HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977 Election Beckman Qualifications MEMORANDUM:
TO: Mayor Verbic and members of the City Council.
FROM: Councilman Herbert Hill
SUBJECT: Opinion from the Attorney General of the State
of Illinois on the qualifications of Councilman
Ronald Beckmann to hold office.
In an effort to resolve the question of the qualifications of
Councilman Ronald Beckmann to hold his seat on the Elgin City
Council I suggest that we submit the facts, as we know them,
to the Attorney General of the State of Illinois for his opinion
as to whether or not Councilman Beckmann's living arrangement
qualifies him as a legal resident of the City of Elgin.
The principal facts in this case are not in dispute and could
be submitted to the Attorney General as outlined in the attached
letter. The central issue in this controversey is whether or
not living in a home other than your principal abode for the
majority of the nights of each week qualifies that place as one's
legal residence for voting purposes.
If the Attorney General finds that this arrangement satisfies the
law we can drop the matter, on the other hand if he finds that
this living arrangement does not meet the test for residency we
can declare Councilman Beckmann's seat to be vacant and go about
the task of selecting his replacement.
The Attorney General's office is a disinterested third party who
could be expected to deliver an unbiased opinion. In taking this
step the City Council would not be wasting any more of its time
and the procedure would not require the expenditure of any tax-
payers dollars. The City Council would be fulfilling it oblig-
ation to uphold the law, and could not be accused of sweeping an
important question under the carpet.
Herbert Hill
July 8, 1977
TELEPHONE 312/695-6500
OF Et,
Any
te. �qk - 'gin150 DEXTER COURT E L G I N , ILLINOIS 6 0 1 2 0
tttu rt0
Mrs. Marie Yearman
City Clerk
150 Dexter Court
Elgin, Illinois 60120
Dear Mrs. Yearman:
We, the undersigned members of the Elgin City Council, indicate
by our signatures below that we hereby call for a special meeting
of the Elgin City Council to be held at 8:00 P.M. on Wednesday,
July 6, 1977, in the council chambers for the purpose of discussing
the qualifications of Ronald Beckmann to continue to serve on the
Elgin City Council, and further direct you to serve notice on all
members of the Elgin City Council by 8:00 P.M. Tuesday, July 5, 1977,
as required by law.
Richard L. Verbic, Mayor
• w
Harry W. Barnes, Councilman
K5P4-4/:164/14nr
Robert Gilliam, Councilman
Herbert L. Hill , Councilman
Judith Anne Strattan, Councilwoman
S eve West, Councilman
•
TELEPHONE 312/695-6500
(41401`fgC
� tit
150 DEXTER COURT ELGIN , ILLINOIS 60120
July 13, 1977
The Honorable William E. Scott
Attorney General of the State of Illinois
Springfield, Illinois
Dear Attorney General Scott:
The qualifications of City Councilman Ronald Beckmann to serve on the
Elgin City Council have been challenged because of a dispute over his
legal residency. We are submitting the facts that have been stipulated
in the case and request your opinion as to whether or not Councilman
Beckmann is a legal resident of the City of Elgin.
Councilman Ronald Beckmann was duly elected to the Elgin City Council
in April of 1975. At the time of his election he resided with his
family in an apartment on Congdon Avenue in the northeast section of
the City of Elgin. In July of 1975 Councilman Beckmann purchased a
lot at 826 Hopi Drive in Catatoga II subdivision, a residential area
consisting of permanent homes located in an unincorporated area of
Kane County several miles to the west of the corporate limits of the
City of Elgin. In May of 1976 Councilman Beckmann completed construc-
tion of a three-bedroom home on this lot at a cost of $72,000 and
removed his family and belongings from the apartment on Congdon Avenue
to the new location in Catatoga II subdivision.
Upon moving from the Congdon Avenue apartment Councilman Beckmann trans-
ferred his voters registration to 844 Bellevue Avenue in Elgin, Illinois.
The residence at 844 Bellevue Avenue is owned by Councilman Beckmann's
in-laws, Mr. and Mrs. Raymond Gnekow. M . and Mrs. Gnekow are full time
residents of that home and own all of the furniture therein. All of the
Beckmann's furniture and belongings are located in the house in Catatoga II
subdivision.
,Councilman Beckmann claims that he and his family live at the Bellevue
Avenue address four nights each week. The Beckmanns contend that their
attorney told them that residency is determined by the place where one
sleeps 51% of the time, so that staying at Mrs. Beckmann's parent's
home Monday night through Thursday night each week qualifies them as
legal residents. Councilman Beckmann has his drivers license, mail,
telephone and other personal matters listed at the Bellevue Avenue
address. Kane County mails his tax bill for the Catatoga II property
to the address on Bellevue Avenue.
}
The Honorable William E. Scott -2- July 13, 1977
Councilman Beckmann's daughter, Jennifer, has attended school at Hillcrest
School, 80 Airlite Avenue in Elgin since September of 1976. This school
serves the Catatoga II subdivision which is part of the Elgin U-46 School
District. Jennifer is enrolled to re-enter Hillcrest School when the new
term begins in September of 1977. School records indicate that Jennifer's
parents listed her home address as 826 Hopi Drive in Catatoga II subdivi-
sion.
The school serving the Bellevue Avenue address of Councilman Beckmann's
in-laws is McKinley School located at 258 Lovell Street, Elgin, Illinois.
The Beckmanns contend that they received permission from the kindergarten
teacher at Hillcrest School for Jennifer to attend classes there becanse
Jennifer's baby-sitter lived in the Catatoga II area and the arrangement
was most convenient.
The Elgin City Council is faced with the question of what constitutes
residency. The members of the city council have been advised that residency
is defined as one's permanent abode and what is generally considered to be
"home". Councilman Beckmann is relying on his attorney's advice that where
he and his family "sleep 510 of the time" is his legal residence. Council-
man Beckmann admits that he is staying at the Bellevue Avenue address of
his in-laws four nights a week in an effort to hold on to his city council
seat. The City Council would appreciate having your opinion as to whether
or not this arrangement qualifies Ronald Beckmann to be considered a legal
resident of the City of Elgin, Illinois, and thus qualified to hold the
office of Councilman.
•
Hopefully, this type of residency question will not be a new subject for
your office. In that case we would hope to have a prompt answer to this
question so that the controversy may be resolved as quickly as possible.
Very truly yours,
City Council, City of Elgin
By
Mayor
nlc
TELEPHONE 312/695-6500
1 ; ••
OFF tic�
'a 150 DEXTER COURT E L G I N , ILLINOIS 60 1 20
•i,1,r���t
July 13, 1977
Mayor and Members of City Council
City of Elgin
150 Dexter Court
Elgin, Illinois 60120
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
You will recall that I recently advised you that the qualifications of a
council member may be determined by the City Council or by a quo warranto
action brought in the Circuit Court. I also suggested that since there
is no established procedure for such action by the council; quo warranto
seemed more appropriate.
I understand that Councilman Hill has suggested that the opinion of the
Attorney General be sought on the question of Councilman Beckmann's qualifi-
cations in view of his separate residences, in and out of the City of Elgin.
The quo warranto statute provides that complaints may be brought by the
Attorney General or the States Attorney, and if they decline to do so by
a private citizen if a sufficient private interest is alleged. In Peo.
ex rel. Brooks v. Village of Lisle, 24 Ill. App. 3d 342, the issue
presented for review was whether the City of Wheaton, as a municipality,
and as a representative of its citizens, had standing to initiate quo
warranto proceedings challenging the annexation of territory outside the
City of Wheaton by the Village of Lisle. The Court held:
• "The right to act as representative for the People remains
inherently, exclusively and legally vested in the Attorney
General and the State's Attorney. Where matters of purely
public import touching no private interest are involved,
only these public officials can qualify as proper party
plaintiffs. This limitation was intended to avoid the con-
fusion and possible dispute which might arise if concurrent
control of the quo warranto remedy was to vest in other hands.
(People v. Wood, 411 Ill. 514, 521-25 (1952) .) We therefore
find that the City of Wheaton, in its capacity as representa-
tive of the People, fails to qualify under Section 2 of the
Quo Warranto Act as a proper party plaintiff to assert a
public right.
Mayor and Members of City Council -2- July 13, 1977
There remains the question of whether the City of Wheaton
is a proper party to apply for leave to file a quo warranto
complaint as a 'citizen having an interest in the question
on /its? own relation. ' As previously noted, this interest
must be private in nature in order to entitle one to file a
petition on his own relation. Although it may appear that
the City of Wheaton, in a certain sense, has an interest
not common to the general public, only by turning our backs
on the fundamental characteristics of quo warranto, its
origin and development, could we find plaintiff's interest
to be private. (People v. Wood, supra, at 524.) The right
here asserted is plaintiff's interest in planning and zoning
for adjacent territory outside its municipal boundaries,
clearly a governmental rather than private function. (See
Merin v. City of Wheaton, 379 Ill. 504, 509 (1942) , for
the distinction between governmental and private functions.)
We find no private interest asserted and thus the City of
Wheaton fails to ualify as a 'citizen having an interest in
the question on /[ts7 own relation. "'
Therefore it appears that the City Council of the City of Elgin may not
institute quo warranto proceedings. For the reasons expressed orally and in
writing, action by the City Council may present great practical difficulty.
Therefore, if the City Council believes that further action is required, I
recommend that it forward the facts as known to the Attorney General and the
State's Attorney for appropriate action, if any.
Very truly yours,
Erwin Jents
Corpo ation Co, el
EWJ/nlc
July 13, 1977
The Honorable William E. Scott
Attorney General of the State of Illinois
Springfield, Illinois
Dear Attorney General Scott:
The qualifications of City Councilman Ronald Beckmann
to serve on the Elgin City Council have been challenged because
of a dispute over his legal residency. We are submitting the
facts that have been stipulated in the case and request your
opinion as to whether or not Councilman Beckmann is a legal
resident of the City of Elgin.
Councilman Ronald Beckmann was duly elected to the
Elgin City Council in April of 1975. At the time of his election
he resided with his family, his wife and daughter, in an apart-
ment at 850 Congdon Avenue in the northeast section of the
City of Elgin. In May 1976, Councilman Beckmann and his
wife and daughter moved out of the apartment on Congdon
Avenue and into certain rooms in a house at 844 Bellevue
Avenue, also in the northeast section of the City of Elgin.
The residence at 844 Bellevue Avenue is owned by Council-
man Beckmann's in-laws, Mr. and Mrs. Raymond Gnekow,
who continue to reside in the portion of the house not lived in
by Councilman Beckman, his wife, and daughter.
In April 1974, Councilman Beckmann purchased Lot #36,
later to be known as 826 Hopi Drive, in Catatoga II subdivision.
The Catatoga I and II subdivisions constitute a residential area
consisting of permanent homes located in an unincorporated
area of Elgin Township, in Kane County, one and one-quarter
miles to the west of the southeast corner of Bowes Road and
Randall Road, the present corporate limits of the City of Elgin.
Being within a mile and one-half of the city limits of Elgin,
the Catatoga subdivisions were approved by the Elgin Plan
Commission and the City Council. At first, Beckmann re-
garded the purchase of the lot as an investment, to be sold
at a later date. Previously, Beckmann had made other such
real estate investments. He had purchased Lot #38 in Catatoga I
in May 1973 and had sold that lot, at a profit, in July 1975. He
had owned a house in Century Oaks, a residential area formerly
outside of the City of Elgin, but annexed to the City about two
years ago. _He had owned a house on Schiller Avenue in the City
of Elgin.
-2-
In October 1975, Councilman Beckmann started construction
of a three-bedroom house on the lot at 826 Hopi Drive, in
Catatoga II. By.May 1976 construction had proceeded to the
point where it could be partially furnished and Beckmann, his
wife, and daughter could spend weekends in the house.
Since May 1976, Councilman Beckmann and his wife and
daughter have lived at 844 Bellevue Avenue from Monday
morning until Friday evening. Weekends, from Friday evening
until Monday morning, Beckman and his wife and daughter
spend at their country home at 826 Hopi Drive, in Catatoga
subdivision in unincorporated Elgin Township.
Councilman Beckmann said in a prepared statement to
the press and the City Council: "I wish to respond once again
to the questions which have been raised about my residence
in the City of Elgin and therefore my legal eligibility for serving
on the City Council. Let me state, loud and clear, I maintain
my residence in the City of Elgin. My wife and daughter and I
reside at 844 Bellevue Avenue. "
Beckmann's wife and daughter live with him at 844 Bellevue
Avenue. Beckmann and his family occupy three rooms and a
bath, plus use of the kitcherr at 844 Bellevue Avenue. This
apartment is furnished primarily with furniture and personal
effects of the Beckmanns, including clothing and toys of their
daughter. The Beckmanns live at 844 Bellevue Avenue, pur-
suant to a formal lease, duly signed and notarized, between
Mr. and Mrs. Be-ckmann and Mr. and Mrs. Raymond Gnekow,
the parents of Mrs. Beckmann. The Beckmanns eat their
breakfasts and dinners at 844 Bellevue. Avenue. The physical
presence of Councilman Beckmann and his wife at 844 Bellevue
Avenue is important to the health of both the father and mother
of Mrs. Beckmann, because her father had a serious heart
attack late in 1975 and her mother had a stroke in the spring
of 1977.
The voter's certificates of registration of Councilman
Beckmann and his wife show his residence at 844 Bellevue
Avenue. Beckmann and his wife have voted, since May 1976,
at Precinct No. 5 of Elgin Township, in which 844 Bellevue
Avenue is included. Their Federal income tax return and
Illinois income tax return show their residence as 844 Bellevue
Avenue. Their telephone number is listed in the telephone
directory at 844 Bellevue Avenue. The City Directory lists
the Beckmanns at 844 Bellevue Avenue.
-3-
The Beckmanns' address for their mail is 844 Bellevue
Avenue. All their charge accounts and credit cards show the
address of 844 Bellevue Avenue. The tax bill for the property
in Catatoga II is mailed by Kane County to the Beckmanns at
844 Bellevue Avenue. Even the dog of the Beckmanns, which
has been at 844 Bellevue Avenue, has on his license the name
of the owner, Ron Beckmann, at 844 Bellevue Avenue. The
two automobiles of the Beckmanns are registered at 844 Bellevue
Avenue. The driver's licenses of Beckman and his wife show
the address of 844 Bellevue Avenue. The Beckmanns receive
their friends and acquaintances during the week at 844 Bellevue
Avenue.
From Friday evening until Monday morning, Councilman
Beckmann and wife and daughter spend their time in the house
at 826 Hopi Drive in Catatoga II subdivision. The house is
not yet fully completed and it is not yet fully furnished. The
Beckmanns had thought when they built the house, that they
would perhaps sell the house at a later date and benefit from
sharply accelerating land values and prices of houses. The
house and surroundings are so nice, that they decided to keep and
use the house as a country house on week-ends. Further plans
of the Beckmanns for the house are not finally decided. It is
possible that the Catatoga development will be annexed to the
City of Elgin, as was another comparable development, Century
Oaks, about two years ago.
Jennifer, the five-year old daughter of Councilman Beckmann
and his wife, was enrolled in Kindergarten in September 1976 at
Hillcrest School. This school, at 80 Airlite Avenue in the City
of Elgin, serves the Catatoga II subdivision which is part of
the Elgin U-46 School District. Councilman Beckmann pays
real estate taxes on his house at 826 Hopi Drive to School
District U-46. Jennifer is enrolled at Hillcrest School for
first grade, when the new term begins in September 1977, with
the specific approval of the school authorities.
School records indicate that Jennifer's parents listed her
home address as 826 Hopi Drive in Catatoga II subdivision.
The Beckmanns state that Jennifer has been enrolled in
Hillcrest School in the hope of continuity, either under con-
continuance of present living arrangements or other circum-
stances. The Beckmanns did not want Jennifer to have to
change schools. In two weeks of vacation, during the last
-4-
school year, the Beckmanns worked on the house and Jennifer
went on the School Bus. Frequently, in the afternoon after
school, Jennifer comes on the bus from Hillcrest School to
Catatoga with her friend who lives next door, and is later
picked up by the Beckmanns. Mrs. Beckmann has stated:
"On occasion, I would leave our Bellevue address too early
in the morning to drop Jennifer off at school and would take
her to our Catatoga home with me where she would later walk
to the school bus with friends. In the fall, Jennifer will stay
with a babysitter after school in the Hillcrest school area."
The babysitter has definitely been arranged for, as the parents
of Mrs. Beckmann are elderly and sick and can no longer serve
as babysitter.
The Elgin City Council is faced with the question of which
constitutes residency. In that case we would hope to have a
prompt answer to this question so that the controversy may
be resolved as quickly as possible.
Very truly yours,
City Council, City of Elgin
By
Mayor
TELEPHONE 312/695-6500
1
4:77, 4.
- ,
,.. ,
Vull L. , ,, 4 iglu
reji 150 DEXTER COURT E L G I N , ILLINOIS 60120
\\--‘2t /
July 18, 1977
The Honorable William E. Scott
Attorney General of the State of Illinois
160 North LaSalle Street
Chicago, I1. 60602
The Honorable Gene Armentrout
States Attorney of Kane County
Kane County Courthouse
Geneva, Ii. 60134
Gentlemen:
The qualifications of City Councilman Ronald Beckmann to serve
on the Elgin City Council have bean challenged because of a
dispute over his legal residency. We are submitting the facts
that have been stipulated in the case to you since Illinois
Statutes indicate that your offices are charged with the duty
and power to examine the qualifications of local public officials
in Quo Warranto proceedings in court.
Councilman Ronald Beokmann was duly elected to the Elgin City
Council in April of 1975. At the time of his election, he
resided with his family in an apartment at 933 Congdon Avenue in
the northeast section of the City of Elgin. In April of 1974,
Councilman Beckmann had contracted to purchase in installments
lot #36 , later to be known as 826 Hopi Lane, in Catatoga II sub-
division, a residential area consisting of permanent homes located
in an unincorporated area of Elgin Township in Kane County. He
acquired title to the lot in July of 1975. This site is located
approximately one and one-quarter miles west of the present
corporate limits of the City of Elgin.
In May of 1976 , Councilman Beckmann and his wife, Sue, and
daughter, Jennifer, moved out of the apartment on Congdon Avenue
into certain rooms of a single family residence at 844 Bellevue
Avenue. The residence at 844 Bellevue Avenue is owned by Council-
man Beckmann's in-laws, Mr. and Mrs. Raymond Gnekow, who continua
to reside in the portion of the house not occupied by the
Beckmanns. The Beckmann's apartment at 844 Bellevue Avenue
consists of three rooms and a bath plus use of the kitchen. The
rooms occupied by Councilman Beckmann and his family are
furnished primarily with furniture and personal effects of the
The Honorable William E. Scott July 18, 1977
The Honorable Gene Arnentrout
Beckmanns, including clothing and toys of their daughter.
The Beckmanns live at 844 Bellevue Avenue, pursuant to a formal
lease, duly signed and notarized, between the Beckmanns and
Mr. and Mrs. Gnekow. The Beckmanns eat their breakfasts and
dinners at 844 Bellevue Avenue. The physical presence of
Beeknann and his wife at 844 Bellevue Avenue is important to
the health of both the father and mother of Mrs. Beckmann,
because her father had a serious heart attack late in 197.3 and
her mother had a stroke in the spring of 1977.
In October 1975, Councilman Beckmann started construction of a
three.bedroom house on the lot at 826 Hopi Lane, in Catatoga II.
By May 1976 construction had' proceeded to the paint where it
could be partially furnished and Beckmann, his wife, and daughter
could spend weekends in the house.
Since May 1976 , Councilman Beckmann and his wife and daughter
have lived at 844 Bellevue Avenue from Monday morning until
Friday evening. Weekends, from Friday evening until Monday
morning and vacations, Beckmann and his wife and daughter spend
at their country home at 826 Hopi Lane, in Catatoga subdivision
in unincorporated Elgin Township.
The voter's registration of Councilman Beckmann and his wife show
his residence at 344 Bellevue Avenue. The Beckmanns have voted
since May of 1976 at Precinct No. 5 of Elgin Township, in which
844 Bellevue is located. Federal and State income tax returns,
telephone listing, City Directory listing, mail, charge accounts
and credit cards all are listed at 844 Bellevue Avenue. The tax
bill for the property in Catatoga II is mailed by the Collector
of Kane County to the Beckmanns at the Bellevue address. The
Beckmann's two automobiles and driver's licenses also show the
Bellevue address. The Beckmanns receive friends and acquaintances
there during the week.
Councilman Beckmann states that he first considered the purchase
of the lot in Catatoga II as an investment, to be sold at a
later date. Previously , he had purchased Lot #33 in Catatoga I
in May of 1973 and sold the lot for a profit in July of 1975.
The house is not yet fully completed and it is not yet fully
furnished. The Beckmanns had thought when they built the house,
that they would perhaps sell the house at a later date and
benefit from sharply accelerating land values and prices of
houses. The house and surroundings are nice and they decided
to keep and use the house as a country house on week-ends and
vacations, as stated. Further plans of the Beckmanns for the
The Honorable William E. Scott -3- July 13, 1977
The Honorable Gene Armentrout
house are not finally decided. It is possible that the Catatoga
development will be annexed to the City of Elgin, as was
another comparable development, Century Oaks, about two years ago.
The house at 826 Hopi Lane, Catatoga II is the only property
which Councilman Beckmann now owns. The house in Catatoga II
is the third house which Councilman Beckmann has owned. The
Beckmanns previously owned a home at 1163 ;Ieadow Lane in Century
Oaks subdivision in Elgin. The house was located within the
city limits of Elgin and was their principal residence. Prior
to that, the Beckmanns owned a house at 846 Schiller Avenue. This
house was also located within the City of Elgin and was their
principal residence.
The Beckmann's daughter, Jennifer, was enrolled in kindergarten
at Hillcrest School, 30 Airlite Avenue, in the City of Elgin, in
September of 1976. Hillcrest School serves the Catatoga II
subdivision which is part of the Elgin U-46 School District.
Councilman Beckmann is a taxpayer in the U-46 School District
through taxes assessed on his house at 326 Hopi Lane, Catatoga II.
Jennifer is enrolled to re-enter Hillcrest School for first grade
when the new term begins in September 1977, with the approval of
school's authorities.
When Jennifer was enrolled in kindergarten, Jennifer's parents
listed her address as 326 Hopi Lane in Catatoga II subdivision,
specifically informed the school authorities as to residence at
844 Bellevue Avenue, and listed 844 Bellevue Avenue as the address
to be-contacted in case of emergency.
The Beckmanns state that Jennifer has been enrolled in Hillcrest
School in the hope of continuity , either under continuance of
present living arrangements or other circumstances. On occasion,
the Beckmanns would leave their Bellevue address for work too
early in the morning to drop Jennifer off at school and would
take her to the Catatoga home with them where she would later
walk to the school bus with friends. In several periods of vaca-
tion, either for Beckmann, or his wife, during the last school
year, the Beckmanns worked on the house and Jennifer then went on
the School Bus. Frequently, after school, Jennifer comes on the
bus from Hillcrest School to Catatoga with her friend who lives
next door, and is later picked up by the Beckmanns. In the fall,
Jennifer will stay with a babysitter after school in the Hillcrest
school area. The babysitter has definitely been arranged for,
as the parents of Mrs. Beckmann are elderly and sick and can no
longer serve as babysitter.
N
The Honorable William E. Scott -4- July 18, 1977
The Honorable Gene Armentrout
Questions have Lien raised in the press and on the radio and in
City Council as •to the residency of Councilman Beckmann at 844
Bellevue Avenue. Since your offices only have standing in the
courts in Quo Warranto proceedings to determine this matter, we
• are directing this matter to you for final disposition.
Very truly yours,
City Council, City of Elgin
By: Richard L. Verbic
• Mayor
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
We the neighbors of Ronald, Sue, and Jennifer Beckmann of 844 Bellevue Ave, are therefore
submitting thier signatures of evidence as to their residency from, Monday thru Thursday
being at 844 Bellevue;
These signatures are to be used as evidence and not for publication;
SIGNED
)ffix, , 3 A__41,-Ifk_a_t_ b--,4)
CCAP#-e, 8/41-
7.14/vt• 79f- s,3 -1 ictee„..„‘
>/-
Sumitted and sworn to me July 13th, 1977
id''%1G441:Yi X44247,&-pg.
/.477y 4/4e4
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
We the neighbors of Ronald, Sue and Jennifer Beckmann of 826 Hopi, are therefore sub-
mitting our signatures of evidence as to thier residency here only on Friday evening,
Saturday, and Sunday, returning to th@jr Bellevue Ave address on Monday thru Thurs;
This is to be used as evidence only, and not for publication;
SIGNED
? / 8 Hopi
f1
7 fild-xp,) )-
•)-- ,
g4-KR/ 8 , 6L
�L
/t26,6(.44, ejelh7,‹:=2)
65 2- �i9-t
Submitted and sworn to me this July 13th, 1977
ALWV-evl
Notary Public
LAW OFFICES
ANCEL, GLINK, DIAMOND, MURPHY & COPE, P.C.
r 180 NORTH LA SALLE STREET
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60601
312 / 782-7606
LOUIS ANCEL DAVID LINCOLN ADER
MARVIN J. GLINK OF COUNSEL
STEWART H DIAMOND
JOSEPH A. MURPHY
RONALD S COPE
PETER M. ROSENTHAL
JOHN B. MURPHEY April 20, 1985
PETER D. COBLENTZ
ROBERT E. GRUNDIN
KATHERINE S. JANEGA
HENRY E. MUELLER
DAVID W. OTT NEWSLETTER SUPPLEMENT
SUSAN L. KURLAND
ROBERT K. BUSH
PETER M. BARRON
BARBARA A. ADAMS
DENISE M. GRAYSON
MICHAEL REIC_H
KEITH A. DORMAN
Traditionally, at this time of the year we receive questions from newly
elected officials concerning such issues as the commencement of the term
of a newly elected official , the compensation of a newly elected official ,
and of particular interest to newly elected mayors, the appointment of
officers. This supplement is intended to answer some of those questions.
The material here is general in nature, and for any particular problem, we,
of course, suggest that you consult your municipal attorney. The statutory
references are to the Chapter and Section of the Illinois Revised Statutes.
APPOINTMENT OF CITY AND VILLAGE OFFICERS
Unless otherwise specifically provided by statute (principally under
the managerial and strong mayor forms) , all officers of a city or village
are to be appointed by the mayor or president by and with the advice and
consent of the council or board of trustees (Ch.24, §§3-7-2, 3-8-1) . There-
fore, the mayor or president is the only one who may submit the name of an
appointee for an office to the council . The power of appointment cannot
be delegated by the mayor to any other person or group (People v. McCann,
247 Ill . 130) . It is up to the council to either approve or reject the ap-
pointment. If the council approves the appointment, there is no problem.
If the council rejects the appointee, and there is a vacancy in the position,
the rejected appointee nevertheless may assume the position as a temporary
officer until the council and the mayor can agree on a permanent appointee
(Ch.24, §3-7-2) . (See the note on the legislative history of this section
which appears in the Smith-Hurd annotated statutes. See also Quernheim v.
Asselmeier, 296 Ill . 4949; People ex rel . Reusch v. Hire, 406 Ill . 341; Dumke
v. Anderson , 3 Ill .Dec. 177) . If the office to which the rejected appointee
seeks ratification is being filled by its previous occupant, who was appointed
for a now-expired definite term, it appears that the holdover officer is
entitled to remain in that position as against any claim of the rejected
appointee (see Trost v. Tynatishon , 12 Ill .App.3d 406) .
Vacancies in all city or village offices are filled in the same manner.
Although appointments are usually for a one-year term, they may be for a
longer term, but unless expressly allowed by statute (e.g. , zoning board
•
LAW OFFICES
ANCEL, GLINK, DIAMOND, MURPHY & COPE, P.C.
of appeals) , they may not exceed the full term to which the mayor or president
was elected (Ch. 24, §3-7-2) . If a new mayor takes office in the middle
of what was the old mayor' s term, the term of those officers previously
appointed for a full term does not cease. If no term is specified when an
officer is appointed, he serves at the pleasure of the appointing authority
and may be removed at any time by the appointment of another person to the
same position (Quernheim v. Asselmeier, 296 Ill . 494) . When a mayor takes
office at the end of the term of his predecessor, he has the power of
appointment for all officers whose terms end with that of the previous mayor.
He need not remove these officers nor ask for their resignation. Rather,
he need only appoint a new officer to these positions, for at the time the
council or board approves an appointment, and the new appointee qualifies
by taking the oath and posting bond, the term of the previous officer ends.
Of course, the mayor may re-appoint the old officer to serve during his term.
This may be done in two ways: (1) the mayor may simply not make a new
appointment since a previous officeholder remains in office until his successor
is nominated, approved and qualifies; or (2) the mayor may ask that the
corporate authorities approve the old appointee as his new appointment.
The council by ordinance should prescribe the duties, define the powers,
and fix the term, salary, and bond of the appointed officer. The municipality
may add duties to an office which was not specified by statute, but the duties
of an office named in the statutes may not be less than those there provided
(Ch. 24, §3-9-1) . Any such appointed officer may resign , but he continues
in office until his successor has been chosen and has qualified. If such
officer ceases to perform his duties or to hold such office by reason of
death, permanent physical or mental disability, conviction of a disqualifying
crime, or dismissal or abandonment of the office, the mayor may appoint a
temporary successor to the officer (Ch.24, §3-7-2) .
Chapter 102, §2, provides that the appointment of any trustee or alderman
to another municipal office in his community except as a volunteer fireman
during the term of office for which he was elected is void.
There is a common misconception that §3-7-2 limits temporary appointments
to thirty days. This is not the case. The only provision in the statutes
which deals with the temporary appointment of officers relates to such appoint-
ments by the Board of Fire and Police Commissioners which may appoint temporary
policemen or firemen for a perod of sixty days (Ch.24, §10-2. 1-16) .
THE CITY COUNCIL OR BOARD OF TRUSTEES. CREATION OF OFFICES; DISCONTINUANCE
OF OFFICE; DUTIES
By ordinance, passed by a two-thirds vote of all the aldermen elected,
the city council in its discretion may provide for the election by the electors
of the city (Ch.24, §3-4-19) , or for the appointment by the mayor, with the
approval of the city council (Ch.24, §3-7-1) , of a city collector, city
marshal , city superintendent of streets, corporation counsel , city comptroller,
or any of them, and any other officers which the city council considers
-2-
LAW OFFICES
ANCEL, GLINK, DIAMOND, MURPHY & COPE, P.C.
necessary or expedient. The two-thirds vote required in this instance does
not invoke the power of the mayor to vote, nor is his office used in figuring
whether the two-thirds vote has been achieved(Ketchmark v. Lynch, 107
Ill .App. 2d 36) . Municipalities thus have a broad choice in the kinds and
numbers of appointed or elected offices they may create. It must be
remembered, however, that to create an office, an ordinance (passed by a
two-thirds vote) is required, while an employment may be created by hiring
someone by simple motion.
In an ordinance or resolution to take effect at the end of the current
fiscal year, the city council , by a two-thirds vote, may discontinue any
office so created, and devolve the duties of that office on any other city
officer. An office cannot be discontinued when the sole reason for the dis-
continuance is to reestablish the position as one which is filled by council
selection rather than the mayoral appointments (Pechous v. Slawko, 64 I11 .2d
576) . After such discontinuance, no officer filling any office so discontinued
shall have any claim against the city for salary alleged to accrue after
the date of discontinuance. The same rules apply to the creation and dis-
solution of village offices.
Chapter 24, §3-9-1, provides that every officer shall perform such duties,
in addition to those which may be prescribed by law, and be subject to such
other rules and regulations as the corporate authorities may provide by
ordinance. This section assures that the legislative branch of municipal
government may assign certain needed tasks to elected and appointed executive
officers. The assignment of duties, however, may not be inconsistent with
statutory power granted these officers, nor may these extra tasks result
in extra compensation (Ch.24, §§3-7-2, 3-13-1) .
COMMENCEMENT OF TERM AND COMPENSATION
The compensation of municipal officers may be fixed by ordinance. After
the compensation of elected officers is fixed, it may neither be increased
nor diminished so as to take effect during the elected officers ' term of
office and shall be fixed at least two months prior to the general municipal
election in which voting is held for such offices (Ch. 24, §§3-13-1 , 3-13-2) .
The requirement that salaries for elected officials must be set in advance
of the election will prohibit the practice of raising salaries between the
date of the election and the date the officials are sworn in for a new term.
The terms of elected municipal officers commence at the first regular or
special meeting of the corporate authorities during the month of April follow-
ing the proclamation of the results of the regular municipal election at
which such officers were elected, except as may otherwise be provided by
ordinance fixing the date for inauguration of newly elected officers of a
municipality. No such ordinance shall fix the time for inauguration of newly
elected officers later than the first regular or special meeting of the cor-
porate authorities in the month of May following such election (Ch.24 §3-2-2) .
Where salaries have been improperly increased, the officer who receives the
improper amount may be successfully sued by a citizen who seeks to recover
the funds for the municipality (Dalton v. Wendt, 14 I11 .Dec. 524) .
-3-
LAW OFFICES
ANCEL, GLINK, DIAMOND, MURPHY & COPE, P.C.
The compensation of appointed officers (except those officers appointed
to fill vacancies in elective offices) may be increased but may not be dimin-
ished so as to take effect during their term (Ch.24, §3-13-1) . This provision
reflects an amendment which became effective in August of 1975 to allow for
increase in the compensation of appointed officers. This amendment was made
possible by §10 of the Illinois Constitution of 1970 which limited the prohi-
bition against salary increases or decreases to elected officials only.
Formerly, neither elected nor appointed officials serving for a definite
term could have their salary changed during that term ( Illinois Constitution
of 1870, Art. IX, §11) .
The salary of appointed officials and employees may be established in
the appropriation ordinance. The salary of elected officials must be estab-
lished in an ordinance other than the appropriation ordinance (Ch. 24, §3-13-2) .
The compensation of the mayor and councilmen in certain manager form municipal-
ities is governed by Ch. 24, §5-4-1.
In a case decided under the prior law, it was held that the salary of
policemen and other officers whose term of office was not prescribed by statute
or ordinance might be changed from time to time (Anderson v. Jacksonville,
380 Ill . 44) . With the change in constitutional and statutory law allowing
increases but not decreases in the salaries of appointive officers during
their term, it could be argued that such persons had a guaranteed minimum
salary. However, both logic and case law would seem to point to the conclusion
that such appointed officers with an indefinite term would still be subject
to upward or downward fluctuations in their salaries (Chicago Patrolman ' s
Ass 'n v. City of Chicago, 56 Ill . 503) . Where there is a minimum wage law,
however, as in the case of policemen and firemen in municipalities over 5,000,
its terms must be complied with (Ch.24, §§10-3-1, 10-3-2) . Also, see Ch.4,
§39s-3, which requires certain work peformed for municipalities to be compen-
sated for at prevailing wage rates. An agreement by the employees to accept
a lower salary will not free the municipality from the obligation to pay
the minimum fixed by statute (George v. Danville, 383 Ill . 454) . Based upon
the 1985 United States Supreme Court decision in Garcia v. San Antonio MTA,
attention must now also be paid to federal statutes affecting minimum wages
and the treatment of overtime pay.
Prior to 1971, the salaries which could be paid to mayors, trustees
and aldermen were limited by statute. Amendments to the Illinois Municipal
Code have altered the law so that mayors, trustees and aldermen may receive
such compensation as is provided by ordinance (Ch. 24, §3-13-1) . Since elective
offices are involved, the ordinance cannot be amended during the term of
office. The mayor, trustee or alderman is thus entitled to a continuation
of the salary in effect at the moment he took office. For aldermen and trus-
tees, the ordinance establishing the salary must state whether it is payable
at an annual rate or for each meeting actually attended (Ch. 24, §§3-13-5,
3-13-7) . Because the salaries of officials become frozen at the time of
their elections, and because terms of office are staggered, it is frequently
the case that one half of the legislative body receives a different
compensation than the other half.
-4-
LAW OFFICES
ANCEL, GLINK, DIAMOND, MUBPHY & COPE, P.C.
Section 3-13-2 of the Illinois Municipal Code prohibits granting extra
compensation to any public officer or employee after service has been rendered,
in addition to the salary or compensation provided for the position. (See
also, Koons v. Richardson, 227 Ill .App. 477) . Moreover, this prohibition
applies to a municipal officer who holds a second office within the munici-
pality for which there is no statutory allowance of additional compensation
(Lee v. City of Venice, 206 Ill .App. 376; Dalton v. Wendt, App. , 14 Ill .Dec.
524) . But where the office of clerk and collector are distinct, an appellate
court has held that it is not improper to increase the salary of the collector
even if that person is also the clerk. Further, where an officer has served
without compensation being paid, an ordinance which grants a salary to the
holder of such office may not take effect during the present officeholder' s
term (Baumrucker v. Brink, 373 Ill . 82) .
Any municipal officer or employee is entitled to reimbursement for any
reasonable actual expenses incurred by him in the performance of his duties
(Ch.24, §§3-13-5, 3-13-7) .
Chapter 24, §3-13-5, provides that aldermen may receive reimbursement
for expenses incurred in attending committee meetings. Although similar
language does not appear in the section regarding trustees (Ch. 24, §3-13-7) ,
the intent of the section appears to allow a like reimbursement. The mention
of reimbursement rather than compensation leads to the conclusion that com-
mittee meetings are non-compensable, and that trustees and aldermen paid
by the meeting are probably only entitled to payment for regular and special
meetings of the entire legislative body. Some communities give their aldermen
or trustees a flat sum as an expense allowance. If the public official does
not use the entire amount of the expense allowance and does not return it
to the municipality, it must be declared as income on his federal and state
tax return.
CONCLUSION
We hope that the foregoing may be of assistance to you. The material
in this Newsletter comes from the Illinois Municipal Handbook, written by
Louis Ancel and Stewart H. Diamond. Lou set the standard many years ago
for our firm of seeking to educate our municipal clients and being available
to answer questions. If you have any questions concerning the material con-
tained in this Newsletter, please do not hesitate to contact us. We also
recommend your attendance at the Conference for Newly Elected Officials
sponsored by the Illinois Municipal League. That Conference will be held
at the Arlington Park Hilton, Arlington Heights, Illinois, on June 7 and
8, 1985.
-5-