by Hank Brockett
1/3/03
Mayoral candidate Wayne Saltzman and James Hutton, the incumbant commissioner of public buildings and property, both were removed from ballots Monday during a hearing at city hall. A third candidate, mayoral hopeful Rich Girot, had his case extended until 9:30 a.m. Jan. 7.
In all three cases, an objetor alleges the candidates filled out petition forms incorrectly and in violation of the state election code. Burton Odelson, an attorney representing Braidwood resident Kenneth Keith, argued for each candidate’s removal from election ballots.
Saltzman and Hutton said they will weigh their appeal options, but both plan on continuing to seek their respective offices. Their options include appealing the Municipal Officers Electoral Board’s decision to a court of law or running as a registered write-in candidate.
As for Girot, the board did not make a decision as his attorney, Scott Pyles, requested time to fact-find and prepare questions for witnesses in the case. In all three cases, though, Monday’s actions have stirred up bad blood right from the start of election season.
Saltzman’s statement filed late
Monday’s hearing — the first step in any decision on election decisions — revealed that the fine print of election law can magnify any irregularity.
Under election guidelines, any registered voter can contest a candidate’s petition. Without a contest, there are no checks on the validity of a candidate’s petition.
In Saltzman’s case, Odelson argued that a missing statement of candidacy was enough to eliminate the Braidwood Park District headfrom the mayoral race.
“That document is the most important document because it declares candidacy ... letting us know that that candidate wants to be a candidate,” said Odelson.
In Braidwood, nominating petitions can be taken out by anyone, but the candidate must fill out the pertinent paperwork and obtain the proper signatures.
Saltzman said he didn’t realize his petition was missing the letter and turned in the statement at 4:45 p.m. Dec. 27, the same day the petition contests were announced.
“I filed late but I did file it,” said Saltzman.
The statement arrived at city hall 11 calendar days after the filing deadline, which was the deciding factor for the three-member board made up of Commissioner Kay Heberer, Commissioner Homer Cole and City Clerk Sue Grygiel.
Girot questions process
Although the board heard no details on Girot’s petitions, arguments from his attorney illuminated some of the more contested issues in all three cases.
When asking for extra time to subpoena witnesses, Pyles alleged there were problems in the electoral board’s attempts at due process.
Pyles questioned Grygiel’s seat on the electoral board, specifically because she would be a witness in fomer mayor Girot’s case. This would mean that she would be sworn in, testify and then have to decide on the validity of her own testimony, Pyles said.
“I don’t think it’s appropriate that she sit on [the board],” said Pyles.
City attorney Vince Cainkar, who ran the meeting, argued that there was nothing in election statutes or prior cases that prohibited her from sitting on the board.
Pyles then went on to question the delivery of the petition objections. While election guidelines call for a representative from the Will County Sheriff’s Office to deliver the notification to candidates, Braidwood used Police Chief Rob Andreina.
Cainkar said he didn’t think the sheriff’s office could handle their time-sensitive request due to the holidays, so he asked Andreina to take over that duty.
While the board granted the continuance, they did not grant the subpoena requests. Instead, Grygiel and Andreina were ordered to appear at the next meeting to offer testimony. Pyles’ request to make Keith testify was rejected.
“The objector does not have to testify,” said Odelson. “That’s why we hire lawyers.”
Hutton questions clerk’s role
Odelson told the board that in Hutton’s petitions, “almost nothing is done correctly.”
Those errors included a non-notarized statement of candidacy and petition sheets lacking numbers and notarization.
Hutton contended that he asked Grygiel if everything was correct while handing in his petitions. While the details of that encounter varied between the participants, Grygiel testified that she has no legal authorization to check petitions.
“Legally, I can’t tell you whether they’re right or wrong,” Grygiel told Hutton.
The Hutton case provided an example of what the Girot case was trying to avoid. Grygiel was sworn in, testified, and then the board (in this case alone substituting Mayor Harvey Taylor for Commissioner Heberer) voted unanimously to remove Hutton from the ballot.
Hutton’s attempt to receive an extension similar to Girot’s was denied. He also asked for Grygiel’s removal from the board due to bias.
If all three candidates are removed from the ballot, only the mayoral race — with Taylor and Chuck Holloway running — would have more than one candidate on the ballot. Each of the four commisioner spots would be running unopposed on the ballot.