Shelby County board and residents press treasurer over low investment returns

Shelby County board members and residents on June 12 pressed the county treasurer for explanations after multiple speakers said the county’s cash was earning very little interest.

A county board member questioned why the county’s cash balances were earning “8 tenths of a percent” and urged staff to explain why the county was not investing more of its funds. “I don't understand why we don't have more money invested,” the board member said during the meeting.

The concern resurfaced during public comment, when a resident asked whether the treasurer, identified only as Erica in public remarks, could be asked to explain the county’s investment approach at a future meeting. “Is there a mechanism that we can use to get Erica in here to explain why the money is invested the way that it is?” the resident asked.

Another speaker, who said they had spoken with the treasurer, reported the treasurer had told local bankers that pulling funds for external investment could reduce lending for local small businesses. “If she pulled any money out, that they would have to start limiting small business loans and loans to the local people because they do count on money,” the speaker said, relaying what they were told.

Other board members and commenters disputed that characterization and urged further verification with banks. “If I were a bank locally… this is their tax dollar to work. The more return we have on our investment, the less taxes they pay,” one commenter said.

Speakers cited specific balances and historical numbers without formal staff confirmation at the meeting: figures referenced included roughly $14 million and $11.9 million at different points, and a 2022 year‑end balance cited as $17,000,009.57. A board member said monthly beginning balances were correct only twice in a 23‑month review and described the county’s bookkeeping as “sloppy,” though also said they had not seen criminal intent by county employees.

Meeting participants also discussed the Illinois Funds program, including a recollection that a presenter from Illinois Funds had said she would “bet my paycheck” that an investor would not lose principal; several speakers cautioned that any investment carries risk and urged careful review of the county’s investment policy.

No formal motion or vote on changing investment practice was taken at the meeting. Multiple speakers asked that the treasurer or staff provide a formal presentation to the board explaining current investment choices, interest returns, and any constraints affecting reinvestment. The board did not set a date for such a presentation during the session.

The issue remained in the discussion stage at the meeting’s end; residents and board members said they would continue seeking documentation and clarity from the treasurer and local banks.