Does a former Illinois state representative lose her General Assembly pension if she pled guilty to mail fraud over a fake-scholarship scheme she ran while in office?
Plain-English summary
Constance A. "Connie" Howard served as an Illinois State Representative from 1995 to 2012. While in office she created an entity called "Tee Off For Technology," set up a bank account in its name, established the "Constance A. 'Connie' Howard Computer Technology Scholarship Fund," and ran annual golf outings to raise money for the Fund. The federal information charged that, between July 2003 and February 2008, Howard "knowingly devised and participated in a scheme to defraud and to obtain money and property by means of false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, promises, and material omissions." She pled guilty to one count of mail fraud and was sentenced in December 2015 to three months imprisonment, three years of supervised release, and monetary penalties.
The General Assembly Retirement System asked the AG whether her conviction triggered section 2-156 of the Pension Code. AG Lisa Madigan said yes. Two facts mattered to the nexus analysis. First, the 2003 invitation to the golf outing identified the event as "benefiting the State Representative Constance A. 'Connie' Howard Computer Technology Scholarship Program" and directed inquiries to "Representative Connie Howard" at her legislative district office. Second, the State Board of Elections campaign-disclosure database showed that Tee Off For Technology, located at the same address as Howard's district office, made seven campaign contributions to her campaign committee totaling $2,550. Howard "intended to and did convert part of such monies to her personal and political use." That use of her legislative office and identity to extract funds was enough to connect the felony to her service as a member, requiring forfeiture under section 2-156.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 2015. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
Common questions
Q: Why is mail fraud a 'service-related' felony here?
A: The AG focused on how Howard committed the offense, not just on the fact of conviction. The fundraising relied on her status as a state representative; the invitation used her legislative title and pointed donors to her district office; the entity that received the money sat at her district office address; and some of the funds were redirected to her own campaign committee. The criminal conduct used her official position as the lever to obtain money, which is what creates the nexus.
Q: Does it matter that Howard was a former, not current, legislator at the time of the conviction?
A: No. Section 2-156 looks to whether the felony related to or arose out of the member's "service as a member." If the underlying conduct occurred during her service (and was committed using that service), forfeiture applies even if conviction comes after she leaves office.
Q: How long after the conduct did the conviction come?
A: The information identified conduct from July 2003 to February 2008. The information was filed in July 2013, the guilty plea entered the same month, and sentencing occurred in December 2015. The AG's nexus analysis treated the timing of the conduct (during her service) as controlling, not the timing of conviction.
Q: Why does using campaign-disclosure data matter for a pension-forfeiture opinion?
A: The AG used it as a public record corroborating the personal-use element of the federal information. The database showed the same TOFT entity (registered to Howard's district office address) made repeated cash contributions to her campaign committee, supporting the federal allegation that funds raised under the scholarship banner went to Howard's personal and political use.
Q: What does Howard keep?
A: Her own contributions to GARS. She loses the employer-funded benefits.
Background and statutory framework
Article 2 of the Illinois Pension Code governs the General Assembly Retirement System. Section 2-156 forfeits all benefits for a member "convicted of any felony relating to or arising out of or in connection with his or her service as a member." The same nexus test from Devoney applies. The forfeiture exists, in the AG's words, to "discourage official malfeasance and to implement the public's right to conscientious service from those in governmental positions by denying retirement benefits to public servants convicted of violating the public's trust."
The Howard opinion is the third pension-forfeiture analysis the AG issued in 2015 (after 15-003 and 15-004) and one of a longer string of similar opinions. Each follows the same structure: identify the conviction, identify the connection between the underlying conduct and official service, apply section 2-156 (or its sibling provisions for other retirement systems), and confirm the right to a refund of contributions.
Citations and references
Statutes:
- 40 ILCS 5/2-101 et seq.; 5/2-156 (West 2014)
- 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 3559(a)
Cases:
- Ryan v. Board of Trustees of the General Assembly Retirement System, 236 Ill. 2d 315 (2010)
- Kerner v. State Employees' Retirement System, 72 Ill. 2d 507 (1978)
- Devoney v. Retirement Board of the Policemen's Annuity & Benefit Fund for the City of Chicago, 199 Ill. 2d 414 (2002)
Source
- Landing page: https://illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/
- Original PDF: https://illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/dA/31f6e07ef8/2015%2015-005%20PENSIONS%20Felony%20Forfeiture%20of%20Pension%20Benefits.pdf
Original opinion text
Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain — the linked PDF is authoritative.
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
STATE OF ILLINOIS
Lisa Madigan
ATTORNEY GENERAL
December 18, 2015
FILE NO. 15-005
PENSIONS:
Felony Forfeiture of Pension Benefits
Mr. Timothy Blair
Executive Secretary
General Assembly Retirement System
2101 South Veterans Parkway
Post Office Box 19255
Springfield, Illinois 62794-9255
Dear Mr. Blair:
I have your letter inquiring whether Constance A. "Connie" Howard, a former Illinois State Representative, has forfeited her pension benefits under the General Assembly Retirement System as a result of her Federal conviction of mail fraud. For the reasons stated below, it is my opinion that Howard has forfeited her pension benefits under section 2-156 of the Pension Code because her felony conviction arose out of and in connection with her service as a member of the Illinois House of Representatives.
BACKGROUND
According to the records of the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois, on July 17, 2013, Howard was charged by Information with one count of mail fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §1341. United States v. Howard, No. 13-30057 (C.D. Ill. July 17, 2013). Howard subsequently pled guilty to one count of mail fraud. United States v. Howard, No. 13-30057 (C.D. Ill. July 24, 2013). On December 8, 2015, the court held a sentencing hearing and sentenced Howard to three months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release. The court also ordered her to pay monetary penalties. The offense of mail fraud is a felony under Federal law. See 18 U.S.C. §3559(a).
The Information, pursuant to which the conviction was entered, states that, from approximately July 2003 to February 2008 Howard "knowingly devised and participated in a scheme to defraud and to obtain money and property by means of false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, promises, and material omissions." Specifically, the Information alleged that Howard: (1) created an entity known as "Tee Off For Technology" (TOFT); (2) established a bank account in the name of TOFT; (3) established the "Constance A. 'Connie' Howard Computer Technology Scholarship Fund" (the Fund); and (4) organized an annual golf outing to raise money for the Fund. The Information charged that Howard used TOFT and the annual golf outings to raise money by "falsely representing that such monies * * * would be used to provide scholarships to students in need who were seeking a degree in computer science and related fields[.]" According to the Information, however, Howard "intended to and did convert part of such monies to her personal and political use[.]"
ANALYSIS
Section 2-156 of the Pension Code requires the forfeiture of retirement annuities and other pension benefits of a member of the General Assembly Retirement System upon his or her conviction of a service-related felony:
Felony conviction. None of the benefits herein provided for shall be paid to any person who is convicted of any felony relating to or arising out of or in connection with his or her service as a member.
Howard became a member of the General Assembly Retirement System as a result of her service as a member of the Illinois House of Representatives from 1995 to 2012. 40 ILCS 5/2-101 et seq. (West 2014).
The purpose of the felony forfeiture provisions in the Pension Code is to discourage official malfeasance and to implement the public's right to conscientious service from those in governmental positions by denying retirement benefits to public servants convicted of violating the public's trust. Ryan v. Board of Trustees of the General Assembly Retirement System, 236 Ill. 2d 315, 322 (2010); Kerner v. State Employees' Retirement System, 72 Ill. 2d 507, 513 (1978), cert. denied, 441 U.S. 923, 99 S. Ct. 2032 (1979). The critical inquiry in determining if a felony is "relat[ed] to or ar[ose] out of or in connection with" public service necessarily turns on whether a nexus existed between the public servant's criminal wrongdoing and the performance of his or her official duties. Devoney v. Retirement Board of the Policemen's Annuity & Benefit Fund for the City of Chicago, 199 Ill. 2d 414, 419 (2002).
Howard's conviction related to, arose out of, and was connected to her service as a State Representative. Howard's criminal conduct, which resulted in her conviction for mail fraud, occurred while Howard was a member of the Illinois House of Representatives. The facts underlying the offense demonstrate that Howard used her position as a State Representative to obtain financial benefits for herself and her campaign committee.
As part of her scheme to defraud, Howard solicited and obtained funds, through an annual golf outing, for scholarships for students in need who were seeking degrees in computer science and related fields. Howard linked her solicitation of funds to her official capacity as a member of the General Assembly. Specifically, the invitation to the 2003 golf outing expressly indicated that it was "benefiting the State Representative Constance A. 'Connie' Howard Computer Technology Scholarship Program" and directed people desiring "additional information [to] please contact Representative Connie Howard" or another individual at the address and phone number for Howard's legislative district office. As the Information states, while Howard falsely represented that the monies raised would be used to fund scholarships, she "intended to and did convert part of such monies to her personal and political use[.]" The State Board of Elections campaign disclosure database indicates that Tee Off for Technology, located at the same address as Howard's legislative district office, 8729 South State, Chicago, Illinois 60619, made seven campaign contributions to Citizens for Howard totaling $2,550.00 between September 13, 2004, and September 13, 2006.
CONCLUSION
Howard used her status as a State Representative to encourage contributions to Tee Off For Technology that she represented would be used to fund scholarships but some of these contributions were ultimately put to "her personal and political use[.]" Accordingly, because her felony conviction was based on criminal conduct that was directly related to her service as a State Representative, it is my opinion that Constance A. Howard has forfeited her pension benefits.
Very truly yours,
LISA MADIGAN
ATTORNEY GENERAL