Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Treasurer Portfolio topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Former deputy treasurer asks board to probe county investments; Treasuer’s detailed October holdings included in packet
Summary
A former county official wrote to the board alleging the Treasurer declined records requests and that the county’s long-term bond positions have suffered significant market declines; the board placed his letter on file and the Treasurer's October investment report — listing roughly $258 million in holdings — was included in the packet.
A letter from former Madison County official Douglas Hulme alleging the county treasurer’s office had refused to provide fair-market-value (FMV) data and warning of large carrying-value declines in the county’s long-term bond portfolio was placed on file at the Nov. 16, 2022 county-board meeting. Hulme, who identified himself in the letter as a former county chief deputy treasurer and county administrator, wrote that FMV requests were denied and that “the county investment portfolio has plunged in value due to long term investments by the county treasurer.”
What Hulme said: In a statement filed with the minutes, Hulme requested the county disclose current estimated FMV and the current losses in carrying value, saying he believed the county had “plunged in value” and estimating possible multi-million-dollar unrealized losses tied to long maturities as rates rose. The letter cites Illinois statute referencing inspection of books and urges that the board consider outside expertise if the Treasurer’s Office will not provide details.
What the packet shows: Separately, the Treasurer’s October 2022 fund report — distributed to the board and placed on file — lists detailed holdings across CDs, municipal bonds, agency issues, corporate securities, and money-market balances. The packet’s summary pages list aggregated investment totals in the hundreds of millions of dollars (the report pages present an investment total reported as approximately $257,645,983.14 and a related sub-total of $175,443,137.63 in sections of the fund report). The Treasurer’s report was accepted and placed on file in the meeting record; no formal board response to Hulme’s letter is recorded in the minutes.
Board and staff follow-up: The minutes do not record a formal reply from the Treasurer at the Nov. 16 meeting; the letter’s author requested that the board publish the FMV data he had sought. Members raised concerns and asked for documentation during later discussion in the meeting packet and referenced the Treasurer’s published monthly report. The minutes show the packet includes thousands of line items and maturity dates for individual securities; the board did not take a separate vote to commission an outside review during this session.
Why this is important: Hulme’s allegation — that FMV information had been withheld and that the county’s investment holdings may have experienced real, substantial unrealized declines — is a fiscal oversight matter that directly affects public accounting, reporting, and public confidence in the stewardship of taxpayer funds. The Treasurer’s detailed holdings in the packet give a starting point for public records analysis, but community members or the board seeking a full FMV accounting would need additional reporting or a follow-up audit to quantify realized and unrealized losses precisely.
What remains unresolved: The letter requests numbers that are not presented in the minutes; the Treasurer’s published holding list gives face-value and maturity information but does not restate the FMV or the carrying losses claimed in Hulme’s note. Board members and citizens interested in a fuller accounting would need either a Treasurer-prepared FMV schedule or an independent review to reconcile purchase prices, market valuations and realized gains or losses.
