No-Ticket Quota Bill Passes The Illinois General Assembly.

Legal updates

No-Ticket Quota Bill Passes The Illinois General Assembly.

May 23, 2014

On Wednesday, May 21, 2014, the Illinois House of Representatives passed the County/Municipality No-Ticket Quota Bill (SB 3411) by a veto proof majority. The quota bill, which would amend the County Code, Illinois Municipal Code, State Police Act, and Department of Natural Resources Law of the Illinois Civil Administrative Code, and which may still be subject to amendatory veto, awaits the Governor’s signature. Under the Effective Date of Laws Act, the bill will take effect on January 1, 2015. 5 ILCS 75/.

SB 3411 was originally introduced in the Senate on February 14, 2014. In its initial form, the bill essentially sought to amend the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act to make it an unfair labor practice for counties or municipalities to have a quota system as part of their law enforcement evaluation scheme. The bill has since been amended, and passed the Senate on April 10, 2014 without inclusion of the unfair labor practice language.

The quota bill, which passed the state legislature with overwhelming support (57 yays and 1 nay in the Senate; 106 yays, 9 nays, and 1 abstention in the House), prohibits municipalities, counties, State Police, and Conservation Departments from requiring an officer to issue a specific number of traffic citations within a designated period of time. Departments are prohibited from evaluating an officer’s job performance by comparing the number of citations s/he issued against the number of citations issued by another officer with similar job duties.

However, the quota bill does not affect a department’s ability to evaluate an officer based on “points of contact.” Points of contact are defined to mean “any quantifiable contact” that is made in furtherance of that officer’s duties, “including, but not limited to, the number of traffic stops completed, arrests, written warnings, and crime prevention measures.” Unfortunately, the quota bill limits home rule authority. Therefore, an affected entity may not deviate from the plain terms provided by the new legislation.

Certainly this legislation raises important questions for affected law enforcement agencies, particularly those with unionized workforces. Whether an affected entity must change or may continue to enforce an existing evaluation system that is based in whole or in part on the number of citations issued is a complicated question. The answer to the question will depend, in large part, on the language of the evaluation system and of the collective bargaining agreement in place.

Under existing Illinois Labor Relations Board law, the substantive content of the system is a permissive subject of bargaining. Village of Orland Park, 21 PERI ¶ 42 (ILRB 2005) (substantive aspects of a performance evaluation involved inherent managerial rights over which an employer did not have to bargain). However, before taking any unilateral action to ensure compliance with the new legislation, an analysis of the collective bargaining agreement’s terms is highly recommended. Several potential bargaining obligations may exist which must be fulfilled before certain changes are made – if, indeed, such changes are necessary because of the new bill.

There appear to be alternative existing strategies which may help dissipate the negative impact of the statute on law enforcement efforts, and which may help ensure that law enforcement officers continue to vigorously and effectively enforce traffic laws.

Please contact a Clark Baird Smith LLP attorney with any questions you may have regarding the new law enforcement quota legislation and how it may impact your workforce.

The CBS LLP Legal Advisory is prepared for general information purposes only. The summaries of recent court opinions and other legal developments are not necessarily inclusive of all the recent legal authority of which you should be aware when making your legal decisions. Thus, while every effort has been made to ensure accuracy, you should not act on the information contained herein without seeking more specific legal advice on the application and interpretation of these developments to any particular situation.
Share by: