
Edgar County tabled 911 board appointments after the State's Attorney flagged a conflict of interest problem the Attorney General first identified in 2015. A new state law added sheriffs to the eligible list but did not resolve the underlying incompatibility.
The Edgar County Board tabled appointments to the Emergency Telephone System Board last month, after the State's Attorney flagged a potential conflict of interest problem that has dogged the county for nearly a decade.
At a Special Meeting in July, board members were set to appoint the incoming Sheriff -- the sole candidate on the November ballot -- and a current part-time sheriff's deputy to the ETSB. The appointments were pulled from the agenda after discussion.
Edgar County's 911 system has an unusual structure. The telecommunicators are Sheriff's Office employees. The Sheriff's Department and the ETSB operate under a contract in which the ETSB pays the Sheriff's Department for their payroll. That arrangement, critics have said for years, puts any sheriff or deputy serving on the ETSB in a position of supervising a contract that benefits their own office.
The Illinois Attorney General's Opinions Bureau flagged the problem in a 2015 informal opinion. It concluded that the Edgar County Sheriff and his deputies could not serve on the ETSB because the roles were incompatible under the Public Officer Prohibited Activities Act and the Simultaneous Tenure Act. A sheriff or deputy on the board, the opinion said, would be "called upon to act or vote with respect to a contract that inures to the official's benefit." The Illinois Supreme Court has held that the Prohibited Activities Act bars public officers from any transaction that could create "competing interests or loyalties that could hamper their performance."
State law changed this year. Public Act 103-693, effective Jan. 1, 2025, amended the Emergency Telephone System Act to add that sheriffs "are eligible" to serve on ETSBs. The law did not mandate their service, and it did not override the Simultaneous Tenure Act or the Prohibited Activities Act. It also included no recusal procedure for the specific conflict the 2015 opinion identified.
The State's Attorney at the July meeting said the new statute had changed the landscape and that appropriate recusal procedures could take place. The Attorney General's Office has not issued a new opinion on the amended law.
A spokesman for the Edgar County Board did not respond to a request for comment on when the appointments might be reconsidered.
Drafted by a large language model from the source reporting linked above, then screened by automated publishing checks. It is not read by a journalist before publication. Some articles cite our Alpha Score. Verify prices and figures against the original source. Educational coverage, not personalized advice.