Pantagraph.com Weather forecast, local radar and more
NewsWednesday, June 18, 2008 11:31 PM CDT
No censure for County Board member after harassment accusations
Investigator still recommends changes in McLean Co. policies
Advertisement

BLOOMINGTON -- An outside investigation did not recommend censuring McLean County Board member Robert Nuckolls, who has been accused of harassing a county employee, but the investigator did recommend 10 changes in county policies to prevent future problems. | Policy recommendations (PDF)

County Board Chairman Matt Sorensen said Robert Kearney, an attorney and associate professor of business administration at Illinois Wesleyan University who was hired by the county to conduct the investigation, determined “shortfalls exist” in the county’s employment and personnel policies and practices.

If those shortfalls are not addressed, they “could open up the county to more liability,” County Board Vice Chairman Dave Selzer said.

“The recommendations are so that in the future, employees and the county have equal protection against harassment,” Selzer said.

Nuckolls’ attorney, Jonathan Backman, said he supports Kearney’s recommendations and the board’s decision to accept the report.

“We believe the board’s decision vindicates Mr. Nuckolls,” Backman said. “He didn’t violate any policies or laws of the county.”

Two women — one who is an employee of the McLean County clerk’s office — filed for orders of protection against Nuckolls in May, alleging he threatened and harassed them. The other woman works at Illinois State University, where Nuckolls is director of ISU’s parking and transportation division.

The women know each other and Nuckolls outside of work.

No criminal charges have been filed against Nuckolls. There is a July 2 hearing date on the orders of protection. In the meantime, the two sides are attempting to reach a settlement.

The County Board hired Kearney to determine whether Nuckolls violated county policy. Cost of the investigation was $8,712.

Sorensen said that while the report did not mention censuring Nuckolls, it did point out weaknesses in some of the county’s current procedures. Kearney’s recommendations include: prohibiting County Board members from participating in job interviews for county positions; developing a system to publicly post all job openings; requiring board members and county supervisors to take part in supervisor training; and updating and strengthening the county’s ethics policy.

The recommendations will be referred to the appropriate County Board committee for discussion.

County Clerk Peggy Ann Milton said: “I look forward to my oversight committee’s recommendation with regard to this topic. I enthusiastically look forward to the training that’s being recommended.”

Sorensen said any policy changes ultimately adopted by the County Board would apply to all county offices, but there is little the board can do to force elected officials to follow the policies. The circuit clerk, auditor, county clerk, coroner, recorder, sheriff, county treasurer and state’s attorney are elected.

Milton said she always confers with State’s Attorney Bill Yoder about policies for her office.

“If different recommendations are made, I will absolutely cooperate,” she said.

Video
Most commented stories
Browse online archives
Recent issues:
Reader comments on this story - 10 total

Note: All views and opinions expressed in reader comments are solely those of the individual submitting the comment, and not those of the Pantagraph or its staff.

uickey wrote on Jun 18, 2008 1:54 PM:

" I wonder as well if these recommendations were pointed to this one office or the entire County government. In a recent Pantagraph article, two Directors (who retired) positions were filled by internal employees and no internal posting or outside applications were accepted for those positions as well. I believe the positions were Director of Court Services and Superintendent of Detention. Both filled without interviews inside or out. "

41617 wrote on Jun 18, 2008 11:42 AM:

" I am a bit confused. Why was the investigation reccomendation directed at the entire Country? The only office involved was the County Clerk's office, so if you read between the lines so to speak, then when Mr Sorensen says weaknesses were pointed out in some of the County' current policies it could only mean in the the office of Peggy Ann Milton because no other office was being investigated. This also would mean the her hiring and posting job procedures along with interviewing need some work. Imagine that!!!!!!!! "

jbackman1 wrote on Jun 17, 2008 6:35 PM:

" As Bob's attorney, I can understand that people will view the Board's vindication of Bob with some skepticism, particularly because the Board's need to maintain the confidentiality of the accuser's identity limits what it can say to the public. At the same time, however, it would be incredibly unfair to Bob to infer (as has The Cats) from the investigator's thoughtful recommendations for future improvements that Bob himself engaged in wrongdoing.

If implemented, the recommendations, which Bob and I support, will protect the County, the accuser AND the accused. So one can no more read into the recommendations that Bob engaged in malfeasance than one can read into them that the allegations of sexual harassment were false. And as for BigBrother, you know not of what you speak. Please, by all means, stay tuned for future developments; at the appropriate time, more will be revealed. But please do not draw inferences where they cannot be drawn. Jon Backman "

BigBrother wrote on Jun 17, 2008 5:39 PM:

" I have a few suggestions of my own for the County Board. 1.) Rid yourself of Mr. Nuckles as he has clearly used his position to assist a person in getting a job unfairly over other candidates. 2.) Rid the office of the persons unfairly hired as they have acquired positions under unfair conditions. 3.) Have only supervisors and managers of employees evaluate the performance of employees. 4.) Have only qualified HR people evaluate the qualifications of applicants and decide on best qualified. 5.) Allow no employee to be supervised by their immidiate relatives. "

The Cats wrote on Jun 17, 2008 5:12 PM:

" To "booklover"...so you know the whole story. Let's here it in all the details. Otherwise why would you post such drivel...how do you know what happened? Try reading a book on sexual harassment (one written from the victims point of view). If they have to change policies there are issues raised by the complaint. An investigator, employed by the employer (in this case), will have a difficult time finding for the accuser because such a finding would automatically hurt the employer tremendously during a civil suit. I am sure this investigator was as fair and honest as possible but he was serving the board and the county. Wait until you see the civil suit (if there is one). "

squirrelioni wrote on Jun 17, 2008 4:50 PM:

" BookLover, I doubt this is a false accusation. Brow beating and verbal intimidation are tools that he freely chooses to use. Now, putting 2 and 2 together from this article, previous articles, the PDF of the reccomendations and a WJBC article that identifies the women as mother and daughter you can see that all parties in this situation have known each other for some time. It makes me wonder how these two women didnt know what they were in for. From the tone of the reccomendations it seems clear that the county employee mentioned in the article secured her job in the time honored "you scratch my back ill scratch yours".
Now im not saying that these women deserved whatever prompted them to file for the orders of protection. Im saying that when dealing with a man with plead down domestic battery charge under his belt you need to be careful what you get yourself into "

SpeakerOfTruth wrote on Jun 17, 2008 3:39 PM:

" They wouldn't have to censure him if they still had prayer in schools "

BookLover wrote on Jun 17, 2008 2:38 PM:

" I wish I was an hysterical woman who could get the whole county in an uproar by falsely accusing people... "

Sassy wrote on Jun 17, 2008 2:03 PM:

" Ooops - commented on wrong article. "

Sassy wrote on Jun 17, 2008 2:01 PM:

" Unfortunately I do not believe that they have the evidence to back up the charges & he could get acquitted. I wonder if the police officer who let Pelo walk away the night he caught him outside the stalking victim's house, feels like he let him walk away with much needed evidence? I'm not sure I will feel very safe if he is acquitted. "

Add your own comments

Please read the rules before posting comments.

You must be logged in to leave comments.
If you don't have a member ID, please register.

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login?
(requires cookies)
  Forgot Your Password?