Guerrero v. Municipal Officers Electoral Board of the Village of Franklin Park
2017 IL App (1st) 170486
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2017Background
- Five Citizens for Change candidates in Franklin Park (president, clerk, three trustees) filed nominating petitions and statements of economic interests (SEIs) listing only the office title (e.g., "Village President") and marking "DNA" for disclosures; SEIs lacked a municipality name, candidate addresses, and dated verifications.
- SEIs were filed with the Cook County Clerk and date‑stamped; petitioners also filed nominating papers with the Village clerk showing home addresses and offices sought.
- Objector Robert Godlewski challenged the nominating papers, arguing the SEIs were deficient because they omitted the unit of government, addresses, and dates, and sought removal from the ballot under 10 ILCS 5/10‑5.
- The Franklin Park Municipal Officers Electoral Board sustained the objections and ordered the candidates off the ballot, reasoning the omissions could permit circumvention of the Ethics Act and that verifications must be dated.
- The circuit court reversed the Board and ordered the candidates placed on the ballot; the Board and Godlewski appealed to the appellate court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether omission of the municipality on SEIs invalidates nominating papers | Godlewski: omission defeats purpose of disclosure and permits circumvention; requires invalidation | Petitioners: nominating papers and filings identify Franklin Park; omission is minor and does not defeat disclosure | Court: omission is a minor defect; substantial compliance exists and does not invalidate nominating papers |
| Whether undated verifications on SEIs invalidate nominating papers | Godlewski: undated verifications make it unclear what year the disclosure covers; warrants invalidation | Petitioners: SEIs were date‑stamped by County Clerk and filed with nominating papers; omission is technical only | Court: absence of date is not fatal given date stamp and ability to connect filings; does not invalidate papers |
| Whether an electoral board may remove a candidate for incomplete or inaccurate SEI disclosures (as opposed to total failure to file) | Godlewski: Board may enforce strict compliance with Ethics Act via Election Code and remove candidate | Petitioners: Welch and related precedent bar ballot removal for incomplete/inadvertently inaccurate SEIs; only Ethics Act provides sanctions | Court: Board cannot remove a candidate solely because an SEI is incomplete in substance; removal for total failure to file is authorized, but minor/form defects do not permit invalidation here |
| Waiver/forfeiture of objections to SEI vs. "receipts" | Petitioners: objector challenged receipts only and thus forfeited SEI‑content claims | Godlewski: substance of filings made nature of complaint clear | Court: no forfeiture; record shows parties treated SEIs as receipts, so merits reviewed |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Board of Election Commissioners, 2012 IL 111928 (electoral boards are administrative agencies; standards of review)
- Cinkus v. Village of Stickney Municipal Officers Electoral Board, 228 Ill. 2d 200 (judicial review principles for electoral boards)
- Welch v. Johnson, 147 Ill. 2d 40 (1992) (ballot removal is not a permissible sanction for inadvertent or substantive inaccuracies in filed SEIs)
- Goodman v. Ward, 241 Ill. 2d 398 (substantial compliance and standards for review)
- AFM Messenger Service, Inc. v. Illinois Department of Employment Security, 198 Ill. 2d 380 (mixed question standard describing clearly erroneous review)
- Kozel v. State Board of Elections, 126 Ill. 2d 58 (electoral board authority limited to validity of nomination papers)
- Lucas v. Lakin, 175 Ill. 2d 166 (ballot access is substantial right; statutes restricting access construed cautiously)