Ross takes issue with budget process; calls for HOPE Trust change
PROTECTED CONTENT
If you’re a current subscriber, log in below. If you would like to subscribe, please click the subscribe tab above.
Username and Password Help
Please enter your email and we will send you a password reset link.
By DAVID CAMPHOUSE
During the Monday, March 24, meeting of the Pike County Board, board member Derek Ross read a statement he had prepared to place on the official record his issues with the 2025 county budget and the process to adopt it.
Ross explains in his statement that his issues with the budget process were so great, he removed himself from the budget process.
“I am submitting this statement to respectfully clarify my position regarding the adoption of the 2025 Pike County budget,” Ross wrote.
“Although I was a member of the Pike County Board during the 2025 budget cycle and may have attended one early meeting, I did not participate in the final discussions or the vote on the 2025 budget.”
Ross stated that his opposition to the budget was rooted in the unwillingness of his fellow board members to seek competitive insurance bids and to go ahead with the HOPE Trust, even though Ross felt seeking other bids would likely save taxpayer money and possibly provide better insurance coverage for county employees.
Ross’s other main issue with the budgetary practices of the board is that the board’s standard practice is to allow blanket budget amendments at the end of each year to account for budget variances.
Ross stated that the practice of allowing such blanket budget amendments “undermines transparency and responsible financial oversight.”
In his statement, Ross went on to question the legality of the 2025 budget adopted by the county board and the legality of the board’s practice of blanket year-end budget amendments.
“Under 55 ILCS 5/6-1001, counties in Illinois are required to adopt a balanced budget where anticipated expenditures do not exceed estimated revenues,” Ross wrote. “If that balance is not achieved—or if estimates are materially inaccurate—it could raise compliance concerns under state law, including 720 ILCS 5/33-3, which outlines the standards for official conduct by public officials.”
Ross also stated that he felt it was his duty as an elected official to seek guidance from state offices if he feels that state statute is being violated by the board.
“If, during the course of future board business, I become aware of any material misrepresentations or procedural concerns, I will reach out to the appropriate State agencies to review and, if necessary, report those matters in accordance with my responsibilities as a public official,” Ross wrote in his statement.
During last Monday’s meeting, Ross also requested that the Pike County Board assign someone besides Jim Sheppard to the HOPE Trust insurance board. The HOPE Trust is the provider of the county employees’ group health insurance policy.
Ross stated that his interpretation of Illinois statute is that Sheppard – who is on the board of the HOPE Trust – is not allowed to serve on both the Pike County Board and the HOPE Trust Board.
“I raised a legal concern regarding a fellow board member’s long-standing service on the HOPE Trust insurance board,” Ross wrote in an email following the board meeting. “Under the Public Officer Prohibited Activities Act (50 ILCS 105/1), county board members are prohibited from holding another appointed office during their term unless authorized by law.”
A proposed bill—HB3003—was introduced in 2025 to create such an exception. However, that bill did not pass, and to my knowledge, no other law currently allows this dual service.
My stance is simple: until legal clarity is provided—either through a formal opinion from the Illinois Attorney General or the Illinois General Assembly amending the Public Officer Prohibited Activities Act (50 ILCS 105/1), —the county should suspend the appointment out of respect for the law and to protect public trust.”
Ross went on to clarify that his intention is not to single out Sheppard, but to protect the county and to effectively serve the county’s residents.
“This is not about individuals,” Ross said. “It’s about ensuring we follow the rules that govern public service. I will continue to speak up when I believe the board’s actions may not align with our legal or ethical responsibilities.”
