The Law is Clear – Will it be followed?

Clark Co., IL. (ECWd) –

As referenced in this article, and this one, there are objections filed against all 10 candidates for the Clark County Park District Board of Commissioners.

What will be interesting is the 5 cases in which none of the petition pages were numbered, which happens to be a “fatal defect” based on substantial case law. Fatal defects leave opportunity for fraud or some other form of manipulation of the petition sheets, which had the error not been present, any fraud or manipulation could not have occurred.

The objections filed by Larry Yargus against 5 of the candidates are based on what is called a “minor error”.  The “minor error” category in this case is due to the fact that when reading the petitions as a whole, the voting public is left with no doubt as to the name of the candidate, where he lives, that he is qualified, the name of the circulator, where the circulator lives, and that each page was properly notarized.

Case law quotes from fatal defect cases due to not numbering petition pages:

• “respondents’ failure to consecutively number all of the pages of their petitions requires their removal from the ballot”.  (WOLLAN v. JACOBY 653 N.E.2d 1303 (1995)

• “in addition to aiding in identification, we believe a legitimate objective of the numbering requirement is to prevent persons from tampering with the petitions. In addition, it is conceivable that the sanctions imposed for noncompliance with section 10-4 of the Election Code will further the State’s valid interest in protecting the integrity of the electoral process by helping to insure that candidates will strictly comply with the requirements of these election laws. (Havens, 102 Ill. App.3d at 571.) Thus, we find that the sanction of removing these candidates from the ballot is rationally related to the legitimate interests of the State and, therefore, is constitutionally permissible.” Jones v. Dodendorf No. 2-89-1020. 190 Ill. App.3d 5557 (1989)

Understanding that trying to read case law can sometimes be a difficult thing, let’s look at the City of Rockford’s electoral board hearing on such a matter. (Channel 13 news)

• “The board ruled that the consecutive numbering of Foreman’s petitioning sheets was not done correctly, and therefore he could not be a candidate on the ballot.”

Not convinced that the courts and other electoral boards take this serious? 

• Candidate’s failure to number any of his 25 petition sheets invalidates his nomination papers. Wilson v. Rowans, 03-EB-ALD-122, CBEC, January 14, 2003.
• Candidate’s failure to number any of his 52 petition sheets invalidates his nomination papers. Wilson v. Jones, 03-EB-ALD-121, CBEC, January 31, 2003.
• Candidate’s failure to number any of his 35 petition sheets invalidates his nomination papers. Ervin v. McQueen, 03-EB-ALD-053, CBEC, January 31, 2003.
• Candidate’s failure to number any of his 63 petition sheets invalidates his nomination papers. Ervin v. Gillenwater, 03-EB-ALD-051, CBEC, January 24, 2003.
• Candidate’s failure to number any of 22 petition sheets invalidates nomination papers. Brummit v. Brewer, 07-EB-ALD-062, CBEC, January 23, 2007.
• Candidate’s failure to number any of the 38 pages of his nominating petition fails to substantially comply with the requirements of Section 10-4 of the Election Code and such failure invalidates his nomination papers. Smith v. Rainey, 03-EB-ALD-007, CBEC, January 14, 2003. See also, Oakley v. Hamilton, 03-EB-ALD-046, CBEC, February 10, 2003
• Candidate’s failure to consecutively number his nominating petitions in violation of Section 10-4 invalidates his nomination papers. Robinson v. Llongbey, 95-EB-ALD-88, January 23, 1995.

For many more cases supporting invalidating of petitions when they are not numbered click here.

All eyes will be on the Clark County Clerk, Circuit Clerk, and State’s Attorney during Thursday’s petition hearing scheduled for 2pm at the Clark County Court house.  If the board reads the law and applies it I believe Clark County voters will have 5 candidates on the ballot who will represent the citizens interest, not their own.