-------- Original message --------

From: Carla Paschal <CPaschal@WinCoIL.us>

Date: 1/30/19 8:32 AM (GMT-06:00)
To: Frank Haney <Frank@wincoil.us>
Cc: Dave Boomer <davidboomerwinn4@gmail.com>, David Boomer <DBoomer@WinCoIL.us>,
Joe Hoffman <JHoffman@WinCoIL.us>, Joe Hoffman <joe.hoffman37@comcast.net>, Keith
McDonald <KMcDonald@WinCoIL.us>, Keith McDonald <kmx2@aol.com>
Subject: RE: Interview Request - Efficiency and Feasibility Study - County Auditor

If you sit on a board and ask for a study by the group, I do think the results can
be questioned. When I was a partner with Sikich, we were prohibited from doing
work for any organization we sat on the Boards of, and in some cases were
prohibited if any partner sat on a Board of the organization (i.e. financial
institutions). I think there are different levels of research however. The references
you make below are for a group to further their cause, not decide the
organization structure or elimination of an Elected Official’s office. Mr. Crowley
and the Appointed Auditor at McHenry County have both declined to participate
in this study. Continuing to pursue this study could be construed as interfering
with the internal operation of the Auditor’s office.

You are confusing the hiring of consultants for guidance with the conducting of
an independentreview. These are two very different things. In the first, the
client’s goals are what drive the process. In the second, they should not.

I am not political and never have been. I spent 30 years of my career putting
independence and ethics as a priority in everything I do. I am protecting the
interests of the County at all times and you stating what you did is very
unprofessional.

From: Frank Haney <Frank@wincoil.us>

Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2019 8:12 AM
To: Carla Paschal <CPaschal@WinCoIL.us>
Cc: Dave Boomer <davidboomerwinn4@gmail.com>; David Boomer
<DBoomer@WinCoIL.us>; Joe Hoffman <JHoffman@WinCoIL.us>; Joe Hoffman
<joe.hoffman37@comcast.net>; Keith McDonald <KMcDonald@WinCoIL.us>;
Keith McDonald <kmx2@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Interview Request - Efficiency and Feasibility Study - County
Auditor
As a follow-up:

If we apply your line of thinking, then can we trust the research coming from the
CJCC even though it is also a best practice in the state? Are you making the
same assertion to the Chief Judge, SA, Mayor, myself, US Attorney, Public
Defender with the CJCC and the research coming from that group? The model is
essentially the same. Note: The Chief Judge is the chair of the Council. The SA
is vice chair. Are you saying research can’t be trusted because of their
involvement?

Is WINGIS work no longer able to be trusted because there is a board as well?

That makes no sense.

If we apply your line of thinking, are we to no longer to trust Baker Tilly’s

recommendations because we pay them for their services, thus they are not truly
independent? Can we no longer trust the advice of the PSB program manager
because we authorize his contract? Where does this stop? Can we not trust
staff’s advice because they get a paycheck and therefore can’t be truly
independent?

If this is your viewpoint, then it is not in-line when one professional staff member
at any public entity in the community. Nobody would agree with you on this. And
every board member on the RPC, CJCC, WINGIS would be insulted.

Carla, County Administrators don’t think, talk, or act like this. People playing
political games do. And that is what this is. You are making this about people, not
policy and proven best practice.

Additionally, please note: you still report to me. I haven’t signed the resolution
yet. Knock this off.
Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 29, 2019, at 9:18 PM, Frank Haney <Frank@wincoil.us> wrote:

Ok. I am not sure what was intended to be accomplished here.

You have always been welcome to discuss county issues with others. But it
doesn’t seem productive to start the conversation on an issue with someone
other than the person directly involved.

I will continue to encourage you to engage our external partners. All upside.
Again, this is key to us seizing opportunities and not missing them.

Forgive the extra emails and communication as of late. I am trying to ensure

clarity and combat misinformation.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 29, 2019, at 8:14 PM, Carla Paschal <CPaschal@wincoil.us> wrote:

In a true independent study, the professionals conducting the study are

independent. You sit on the RPC Board and therefore, those conducting the
study are not truly independent as you. In effect, oversee the staff at a high level.
It is similar to internal auditors of major corporations. They report to the Board,
not the CEO or other management, as they are reporting on the work of those
employees.
I reported this to the caucus chairs and blind copied the Committee chairs as to
not violate the open meetings act. Now that I report to the Board, I feel I need to
report information to a section of the Board. I will request more guidance in the
future as to who this should be.

I never agreed when approached by you to participate in this study as the intent
is to eliminate the office. I think the time would be better spent, as Mr. Crowley
suggested and I tried to relay to you, to update the state statue and make the
office require more credentials and updated responsibilities. Mr. Crowley
confirmed this in recent email exchanges. I feel this office is critical to provide
oversight of Elected Officials and Administrative offices and their recent work has
confirmed this value.

From: Frank Haney <Frank@wincoil.us>

Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2019 6:44 PM
To: Carla Paschal <CPaschal@WinCoIL.us>; Dave Boomer
<davidboomerwinn4@gmail.com>; David Boomer <DBoomer@WinCoIL.us>;
Joe Hoffman <JHoffman@WinCoIL.us>; Joe Hoffman
<joe.hoffman37@comcast.net>
Cc: Keith McDonald <KMcDonald@WinCoIL.us>; Keith McDonald
<kmx2@aol.com>
Subject: RE: Interview Request - Efficiency and Feasibility Study - County
Auditor

Hello everyone,

Now I love our caucus chairman as much as anyone. But it is odd professional
staff would start with someone other than the person directly involved, much less
with the caucus folks (thus partisan, political, technically not part of government)
vs. the operations committee of the board (government).

I respectfully disagree with multiple aspects of this email. Let’s pull this apart for
clarity.
To be clear, it has never been suggested, nor is it true, that I need board
approval to assign research hours in our already ‘board approved’ (paid for)
membership to the RPC. Are we changing the rules now?

For example, board approval wasn’t required on the following:

- clerk / recorder study

- population decline study

- workforce, economic development research

- pulled data for highway department around transportation

- WINGIS work

- exploration of numerous grants on behalf of the community and county

(Sheriff’s Department, Highway). Note: accepting grants once secured is
different, especially when they is matching involved.

Are you merely suggesting an update be provided to a committee on all the ways
they are serving us? Ok. When? You can coordinate that without my
involvement. I have encouraged you to engage more on this front.

Yes, we are partnering in the study with McHenry. I actually informed the former
Ops chairman about this study many months ago. He said it was great and it
didn’t hurt to review such things. Naturally, we agreed we would share the
findings of the research when the work was done. Note: no new cost to the
county.

The conflict of interest comment is really off base and, frankly, concerning. Are
you asserting a conflict of interest on having a professionally trained, non-
partisan, researcher do research? How? If that is true, you just asserted that
against every planning council in the state as well as every researcher, planner,
or grant writer who work at a planning council in the state. Is all their work
invalid? Mayor Jury sits on the RPC board and they had the RPC do land
planning for them. Is that a conflict? Mayor Chamberlin did the same. Others.
Honestly, I don’t understand where you are coming from on this.
Here is the good news - Planning councils are best practice. They exist all over
the state and county. They leverage multi-agency partnerships on a regularly
basis. It saves money and avoids duplication, especially on items that cut across
multiple jurisdictions. Of all the dumb government being done out there, this isn’t
one such example. We should have done this a decade ago but our silo-centric,
corrosive politics got in the way.

Lastly, this review is different than what Baker Tilly looked at. I do know we
discussed this some time back and your invitation to share your thoughts as a
former auditor was discussed. Don’t participate if you don’t want to. If you do,
please feel free to share your experiences and opinions. Crowley was in, then
out, then in, then out. That’s ok. I actually like his idea of adding a credential to
the position. That would add to the context of the study. At one point, you
seemed more than ok in participating in this. You never mentioned anything
about the board then.

The good news is that the harder you look at and scrutinize the RPC and its
model, the more you will see its value to the county and community.

We need our leaders, both elected and appointed, to be at least be open to

seeing if the status quo is preferable to something new. We can’t stay insulated.
If we do, …

Happy to discuss further.

Respectfully,
Frank
From: Carla Paschal <CPaschal@WinCoIL.us>
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2019 4:43 PM
To: Dave Boomer <davidboomerwinn4@gmail.com>; David Boomer
<DBoomer@WinCoIL.us>; Joe Hoffman <JHoffman@WinCoIL.us>; Joe Hoffman
<joe.hoffman37@comcast.net>
Cc: Frank Haney <Frank@wincoil.us>
Subject: FW: Interview Request - Efficiency and Feasibility Study - County
Auditor

Molly and I received an email to participate in an efficiency study for the County
Auditor to be performed for Winnebago County by the Regional Planning
Council. Because I was not aware of the Board authorizing this study I asked
who had. The study was authorized by the Chairman (see below).

As you know, I was an external auditor for 30 years before coming to the County.
Having the Regional Planning Council conduct such a study would appear to be
a conflict of interest. Chairman Haney sits on the RPC’s Executive Board so it
seems unlikely they could perform an independent review.

The Auditor’s office performs a very necessary function at the County. Some of
the functions performed by the Auditor’s office were reviewed by Baker Tilly
(dated August 3, 2018) and their report included some recommendations related
to processes that affect the Auditor’s office, HR and Finance. The Baker Tilly
report recommended other offices be studied but did not include the Auditor’s
office as one of the offices to be studied.

Please let me know if you have authorized this study and if you would like Molly
and I to participate.

Thanks,
Carla D. Paschal, CPA
County Administrator

404 Elm St., Room 533

Rockford, IL 61101

Phone: (815) 319-4278

Fax: (815) 319-4226

Email: cpaschal@wincoil.us

<image001.png>

From: Ivy Hood <IHood@r1planning.org>

Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2019 12:30 PM
To: Carla Paschal <CPaschal@WinCoIL.us>
Cc: Michael Dunn <MDunn@r1planning.org>
Subject: RE: Interview Request - Efficiency and Feasibility Study - County
Auditor

Previous discussions and go ahead were with Chairman Haney. McHenry county
is also supporting this study, and an analysis of their circumstances will also be
included in the final report.

Thank you,

Ivy Hood
Research Associate
A 313 N. Main Street / Rockford, Illinois 61101
P 815-319-4195 / W r1planning.org

<image002.png>

From: Carla Paschal [mailto:CPaschal@WinCoIL.us]

Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2019 12:27 PM
To: Ivy Hood <IHood@r1planning.org>
Subject: RE: Interview Request - Efficiency and Feasibility Study - County
Auditor

Who authorized this?

From: Ivy Hood <IHood@r1planning.org>

Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2019 12:26 PM
To: Carla Paschal <CPaschal@WinCoIL.us>
Subject: RE: Interview Request - Efficiency and Feasibility Study - County
Auditor

Thank you for prompt response. This study is on behalf of Winnebago County.

From: Carla Paschal [mailto:CPaschal@WinCoIL.us]

Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2019 12:18 PM
To: Ivy Hood <IHood@r1planning.org>
Cc: Michael Dunn <MDunn@r1planning.org>
Subject: RE: Interview Request - Efficiency and Feasibility Study - County
Auditor
Who is this study being performed on behalf of?

From: Ivy Hood <IHood@r1planning.org>

Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2019 12:16 PM
To: Carla Paschal <CPaschal@WinCoIL.us>
Cc: Michael Dunn <MDunn@r1planning.org>
Subject: Interview Request - Efficiency and Feasibility Study - County Auditor

Hello Ms. Paschal,

I hope this message finds you well. I am writing because I would like to include
your expertise in the study on the efficiency of an elected county Auditor office.

I recognize that you have a full schedule; I would be happy to speak with you at
your office, over the phone, or via email, and at your earliest convenience. I have
attached a list of questions for your reference. If it would be easiest for you to
discuss via email, please feel free to edit the attached, or paste them inline.

I have also attached a copy of the functions for a county auditor in Winnebago
County, per state statute. I am particularly interested in your perspective on
whether any of the statutory functions are currently performed by County
Administration, or by you as the CFO (or any other department of which you are
aware), either in addition to or rather than the county Auditor (both cases are
known to occur in other counties).

In attempt to be as thorough as possible, I have also reached out to Ms.

Terrinoni. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Best,
Ivy Hood
Research Associate
A 313 N. Main Street / Rockford, Illinois 61101
P 815-319-4195 / W r1planning.org

<image002.png>