IDOT Political Hiring Scandal

[Brandon]

Report slams IDOT political hiring

Behind paywall.

Gov. Pat Quinn failed to rein in patronage abuses at the state transportation agency after replacing now-imprisoned Rod Blagojevich, and Quinn's directors repeatedly hired politically connected workers in violation of the rules, the state's top ethics investigator found.

Hundreds of people were hired into a special "staff assistant" position without having to go through strict personnel procedures under rules designed to keep politics out of most state hiring, according to a confidential report by Executive Inspector General Ricardo Meza obtained by the Tribune.

The rules have been in place since before Blagojevich took office in 2003, but many of those improper hirings at the Illinois Department of Transportation happened under Quinn's Democratic administration, the report said.

The report stopped well short of accusing the governor's office of the blatantly illegal hiring practices under Blagojevich, Quinn's two-time running mate. Meza found no evidence that Quinn's office knew about the abuses and further noted that investigators could not demonstrate "any clear intent" by transportation officials to circumvent the so-called Rutan hiring rules that ban political considerations in most personnel matters.

But the report found that IDOT officials under Quinn repeatedly used the "special assistant" position to hire relatives and allies of politicians – from top Democratic leaders of the state General Assembly to county Democratic chairmen, from Chicago aldermen to members of Congress.

This is Illinois.  What more can I say?

The Meza report said 255 people were hired in the "staff assistant" category from 2003 through 2013 but that the number of politically connected people picked for the job jumped significantly in 2010 and 2011, the years Quinn ran for and then began his first full term as the state's chief executive. He moved up from lieutenant governor in January 2009, when legislators impeached and tossed out Blagojevich for corruption.

Hiring for the staff assistant position was handled under a set of personnel procedures typically reserved for higher-level, policymaking jobs, where officials are allowed to consider political allegiance, the inspector general noted. But Meza found that many of the workers hired under that job title ended up doing work such as mowing, answering phones, planting trees and organizing files – lower-level jobs that are supposed to be covered under stricter personnel rules that give a fair shot to any qualified applicant.

Basically, political hacks were given jobs that included road maintenance.  No wonder the mowing in this state sucks compared to Wisconsin and Indiana.

After receipt of the Meza report June 12, Quinn directed IDOT to abolish the staff assistant position, ordered a full audit of all positions exempt from the normal hiring guidelines and froze hiring of anyone into such categories, spokesman Grant Klinzman said.

Quinn replaced Schneider with Borggren, a former director of the Illinois Department of Veterans Affairs. Two other IDOT personnel officials were cited for a litany of hiring violations in the report and have both resigned.

About three years in the making, the report emerged while IDOT was already under fire. In April, attorney Michael Shakman, who has long crusaded against patronage, asked a federal judge to investigate IDOT's hiring. He argued that positions were being "filled with employees based on political considerations rather than qualifications."

Basically we're paying for patronage instead of good roads in Illinois.

[hbelkins]

Been going on in Kentucky for years. The Republican governor elected in 2003 tried to break the cycle, but the Democrat attorney general prosecuted the administration for -- wait for it -- political patronage.

It all depends on whose ox is getting gored (and whose supporters are getting jobs). When it was done in Kentucky for years (see third paragraph of this post) it was OK. Let someone try to fix it, and they get accused of patronage in hiring. Black is white, up is down, wet is dry and right is wrong.

[DJStephens]

Sounds a lot like what goes on in New Mexico.   

[J N Winkler]

I wonder if any of these "special assistants" were involved in confecting designs for guide signs, which are quite uneven but generally worse in Illinois compared to Wisconsin and Indiana.

[dave069]

I feel that the former IDOT secretary, Ann Schneider was a political hack. She was originally appointed by former Gov. Rod Blagojevich in 2006 and promoted to director under Quinn. There is definitely a reason as to why she resigned and I'm sure its partially her being a political hack. I still couldn't believe she wanted the rural speed limit to stay 65, as most traffic engineers will tell you that 70 mph on rural interstates is perfectly safe. Of course she wasn't a traffic engineer at all and was just a Chicago political hack. Good thing she didn't get her way on that one!

I am dissapointed in Gov. Quinn for continuing political hiring in IDOT. However, this is Illinois so no surprise. Hopefully the new IDOT director is better!

[SEWIGuy]

The top level jobs in any state agency are political hires.  And in some ways that is out of necessity and not necessarily a bad thing.  Politicians know how to communicate with legislators.  They are generally good at communicating with the general public. 

The key is that they also have to trust the non-politicians below them, and they have to have a genuine passion for the agency they are representing.

Wisconsin's Secretary of Transportation is a politician...but he is also a civil engineer. 

[dave069]

The top level jobs in any state agency are political hires.  And in some ways that is out of necessity and not necessarily a bad thing.  Politicians know how to communicate with legislators.  They are generally good at communicating with the general public. 

The key is that they also have to trust the non-politicians below them, and they have to have a genuine passion for the agency they are representing.

Wisconsin's Secretary of Transportation is a politician...but he is also a civil engineer.

Our former secretary wasn't so good at listening to or trusting the non-politicians, especially on the issue of speed limits. I don't really mind political hiring as long as the person hired is an engineer. Ann Schneider was not an engineer. I don't think the new secretary Erica Borggren is one either, but she wasn't originally appointed by Blagojevich so maybe she will be a better head IMO.

[hbelkins]

The more I think about it, the more I think that transportation agencies should NOT be headed by engineers. Can't really put my finger on the precise reason why I feel this way, but in general I don't think engineers are as responsive to public concerns as they should be. For instance, criteria (or warrants, in engineer-speak) for guardrail or traffic signals almost always require an accident (or crash, in engineer-speak) history. In other words, they wait until someone gets hurt or killed instead of doing something to prevent it.

I'm not a big advocate of the SOMEBODY'S GOTTA DO SOMETHING!!! OMG!!! philosophy, but sometimes it's better to be proactive than reactive.

[jeffandnicole]

The more I think about it, the more I think that transportation agencies should NOT be headed by engineers. Can't really put my finger on the precise reason why I feel this way, but in general I don't think engineers are as responsive to public concerns as they should be. For instance, criteria (or warrants, in engineer-speak) for guardrail or traffic signals almost always require an accident (or crash, in engineer-speak) history. In other words, they wait until someone gets hurt or killed instead of doing something to prevent it.

I'm not a big advocate of the SOMEBODY'S GOTTA DO SOMETHING!!! OMG!!! philosophy, but sometimes it's better to be proactive than reactive.

I would think it's the other way around.  An engineer would know what needs to be done, but he/she is often limited by the amount of funding that is available.  A politician, on the other hand, will make a lot of noise about getting something done, especially after an accident or death. But...that money doesn't come free.   Sometimes, it's a project that was in the pipeline anyway, and may simply be moved up.  But most often, another project or projects that have been in the works for years by engineers who know what should be done can be delayed, reduced in scope, or cancelled entirely, because this politician wants to appear proactive towards his voters, even though a similar accident in that same area won't happen again, especially if the cause of the accident is alcohol, texting, etc.

[J N Winkler]

The more I think about it, the more I think that transportation agencies should NOT be headed by engineers. Can't really put my finger on the precise reason why I feel this way, but in general I don't think engineers are as responsive to public concerns as they should be. For instance, criteria (or warrants, in engineer-speak) for guardrail or traffic signals almost always require an accident (or crash, in engineer-speak) history. In other words, they wait until someone gets hurt or killed instead of doing something to prevent it.

I have a considerable amount of sympathy with this view, but not necessarily for the same reasons.  In the case of guardrail or traffic signals at a specific location, it would be very unusual for the decision to cross the desk of the agency head, whether or not he or she was an engineer.

I would say that whether a state DOT head is an engineer or not, he or she must have superlative public communication skills and be able to see the various ways in which a decision is perceived that diverge from its technocratic merits (including not just engineering criteria but also economics and planning-related considerations).  His or her stance must always be one of willingness to try to accommodate any such concerns that are not facially unreasonable.

In Kansas there is no requirement for the KDOT secretary to be an engineer.  The post is a gubernatorial appointment and both engineers and non-engineers have held it in the recent past.  Mike King, the current secretary, is not an engineer but has a construction degree and used to run a company that is active on KDOT projects.  Deb Miller, his immediate predecessor and the longest-serving KDOT secretary, had a BA in sociology from Kansas State and had worked in KDOT's transportation planning unit for about a decade in the late 1980's and early 1990's before she left for private industry.  E. Dean Carlson, Miller's predecessor and the last KDOT secretary who was an engineer, was the retired FHWA executive director (not the same as the FHWA administrator) and, before that, had been either the state or regional FHWA director for the operating unit that covers the Minneapolis-St. Paul urban area, where he is remembered for unhelpful interventions in Interstate planning controversies back in the 1970's.  Of the three, Carlson was the only one with a PE license.

Carlson had the kinds of PR problems that are usually easy for more politically savvy people to dodge.  Some of them were self-inflicted.  While he was the KDOT secretary, he was sued in his personal capacity as former FHWA director for not having enforced a directive he issued requiring states to use collapsible guardrail end treatments.  The plaintiffs in that case were the parents of a college student who died when her car spun out on ice on I-70 near Junction City and was T-boned by a non-conforming guardrail end.  He won that case, but in terms of public perception, it is nearly always unhelpful for a state agency and its officials to escape liability through sovereign immunity.

Also, when K-96 between Wichita and Hutchinson was upgraded from two-lane to four-lane divided substantially on the present "beeline" routing that bypasses Colwich and Andale, there were a number of crashes (some fatal) which consultants hired by KDOT later attributed to minimum geometric design criteria being used.  KDOT published the consultants' report and Carlson took it upon himself to write a preface which said that K-96 met Green Book guidelines and implied that this was all that mattered.  He was correct so far as technical compliance was concerned, but that was not really the point.  Using the fact that your infrastructure meets agreed criteria as a springboard to tell people that their legitimate concerns have no validity is not the way to build support for your agency and its programs.

It was striking how much more circumspect Miller was when a high-profile crash on K-10 near Eudora (discussed extensively in a thread on the Central States board) attracted criticism of KDOT's engineering practice.  There were calls for KDOT to install a median cable barrier to prevent similar crashes in the future, notwithstanding the fact that the involved length of K-10 already had a 60' median and was thus a poor candidate for cable barrier in comparison to other KDOT-maintained freeways with 45' medians, such as K-96 in northeast Wichita, where cable barrier was about to be trialled.  KDOT under Miller expressed reservations about the economic merit of cable barrier on K-10 compared to other safety interventions that could be purchased with the same money, but never said No categorically to median barrier for K-10, or otherwise tried to hide behind the design.  This allowed Miller and KDOT to emerge without a PR black eye when Brownback decided to intervene essentially by ordering KDOT to erect a barrier.

[hbelkins]

In the case of guardrail or traffic signals at a specific location, it would be very unusual for the decision to cross the desk of the agency head, whether or not he or she was an engineer.

You'd be surprised.

In Kentucky, the KYTC secretary has a discretionary fund, from which I've seen both guardrail and traffic signals funded.

In one case, there was a public cry for a signal at the intersection of KY 9 (AA Highway) and KY 57 in Lewis County, after a fatal wreck. The engineers consistently said a signal was not warranted there. However, the secretary at the time (not an engineer) overrode them and ordered the signal to be installed.

In another case, in my area, a car ran off the road and into a stream, killing the driver. The newly-minted state representative in the area got involved, including making erroneous claims that the area had a history of fatal wrecks. (The truth was this was the first fatality ever at this location). The location did not meet the criteria for installation of guardrail, yet the secretary (in this case, an engineer and a career employee of KYTC) ordered it to be funded from his discretionary account.

It was striking how much more circumspect Miller was when a high-profile crash on K-10 near Eudora (discussed extensively in a thread on the Central States board) attracted criticism of KDOT's engineering practice.  There were calls for KDOT to install a median cable barrier to prevent similar crashes in the future, notwithstanding the fact that the involved length of K-10 already had a 60' median and was thus a poor candidate for cable barrier in comparison to other KDOT-maintained freeways with 45' medians, such as K-96 in northeast Wichita, where cable barrier was about to be trialled.  KDOT under Miller expressed reservations about the economic merit of cable barrier on K-10 compared to other safety interventions that could be purchased with the same money, but never said No categorically to median barrier for K-10, or otherwise tried to hide behind the design.  This allowed Miller and KDOT to emerge without a PR black eye when Brownback decided to intervene essentially by ordering KDOT to erect a barrier.

I remember this. It happened shortly before Richie Kennedy hosted his Lawrence meet. We were pretty close to the site on the meet tour.

[Scott5114]

Oklahoma avoids this problem by having both a Secretary and a Director of Transportation. The Director oversees ODOT and usually has technical experience within the agency (former director Gary Ridley worked has way up from a maintenance supervisor), while the Secretary is a more political position that is part of the governor's cabinet. However, two people have occupied the positions of Director, Secretary, and Director of OTA concurrently; presumably an individual doing so possesses both technical and political acumen.

[hbelkins]

Kentucky has a secretary of Transportation that covers everything (highways, vehicle regulation, driver licensing, aviation, etc.). There is also a commissioner for the Department of Highways (and the DOH is definitely the biggest part of the Transportation Cabinet) and a state highway engineer. I'm not sure if the DOH currently has a commissioner or not, but we definitely have a SHE. I think at times the SHE has also served as DOH commissioner.

[qguy]

The more I think about it, the more I think that transportation agencies should NOT be headed by engineers. Can't really put my finger on the precise reason why I feel this way, but in general I don't think engineers are as responsive to public concerns as they should be. For instance, criteria (or warrants, in engineer-speak) for guardrail or traffic signals almost always require an accident (or crash, in engineer-speak) history. In other words, they wait until someone gets hurt or killed instead of doing something to prevent it.

I have a considerable amount of sympathy with this view, but not necessarily for the same reasons...

A minor consideration: aesthetics. The engineers I worked with at PennDOT were, every one of them, great people–hard working, dedicated to the public good, and thoroughly accountable. But almost none of them had any sense of aesthetics. Making something functional AND nice looking is so often a foreign concept. Consequently, PennDOT's signature "look" is (for example) bridges with railing-less Jersey barrier-type parapets and plain, featureless piers of round or square (in cross-section) concrete posts.

[Brandon]

It gets worse for the incumbent governor.

Federal judge deals Quinn ethics blow on IDOT patronage hiring

A federal judge has granted a request by a Chicago attorney to appoint a monitor to oversee hiring at the Illinois Department of Transportation, dealing a blow to Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn less than two weeks before Election Day.

The transportation agency came under fire in April after Chicago attorney Michael Shakman, who has long crusaded against patronage, argued the Quinn administration was filling positions based on political considerations rather than job qualifications.

A subsequent report by the state Executive Inspector General Ricardo Meza outlined how Quinn had failed to rein in patronage abuses at IDOT after replacing ousted ex-Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

Meza maintained hundreds of people were hired into so-called "staff assistant" positions without having to go through strict personnel procedures under rules designed to keep politics out of most state hiring.

Quinn fired 58 people hired into staff assistant jobs, but decided to keep another 103. Attorneys for his office have argued a court monitor was not needed because reforms were put into place following the inspector general's report, contending the ethics watchdog acts as an independent watchdog.

Shakman argued the changes amounted to little more than public relations, and questioned the thoroughness of the inspector general report.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Sidney Schenkier said his order did not reflect criticism upon the inspector general, but that it was the court's duty to investigate what "broke down" in the hiring process.

All I can say is that this is Illinois.