A letter from the Mullen Regulation Business at the Westside Justice Center in Chicago is casting question on the legality of the remaining assembly of the 80th Evanston City Council and the initially meeting of the 81st City Council, scheduled for 4:30 p.m. and 7:30 p.m. respectively on Might 10.
The letter, from attorney Ed Mullen, was sent by means of email on Might 7 to the six people today who will be new faces at the City: Mayor-Elect Daniel Biss, City Clerk-Elect Stephanie Mendoza, and Aldermen-Elect Clare Kelly, Jonathan Nieuwsma, Bobby Burns, and Devon Reid.
Mr. Mullen writes, “I have been requested to deliver you with a lawful belief as to whether the Metropolis of Evanston’s scheduled Metropolis Council meetings on May possibly 10, 2021, whereby the outgoing City Council is scheduled to meet up with and perform company at the initially conference [scheduled for 4:30 p.m.], adopted by a 2nd assembly [scheduled for 7:30 p.m.] in which the newly elected Metropolis Council will be sworn in to start their phrases, complies with the Illinois Municipal Code.”
The agenda of the 4:30 p.m. conference is made up of quite a few sizeable things on which users of the current, or 80th, Town Council will vote.
These involve the lease of the Harley Clarke mansion, adjustments to the City’s leaf-blower ordinance, approval of the deal for providing h2o to Skokie, approval to get started to negotiate the sale of the Metropolis-owned house on Central Avenue that formerly housed the North Department Library, the approval of meeting dates for a general public listening to and a Joint Assessment Board assembly about the proposed Fifth Ward tax-increment funding (TIF) district, and two objects that remove citizen input from public processes: proposed change in the City’s Board of Ethics techniques and sure specific use procedures.
A story about the proposal pertaining to the Board of Ethics can be identified in this article. A tale about turning certain decisions about new firms can be found here.
The agenda for the 7:30 p.m. conference lists the administration of the oaths of office, remarks, and call of the wards.
Mr. Mullen says his lawful impression is that the 4:30 assembly of the outgoing Metropolis Council – the 80th – would violate Section 5/3.1-10-15 of the Illinois Municipal Code if the freshly elected Metropolis Council associates are not sworn in at that assembly to begin their phrases of business office then.
His letter states, “Section 5/3.1-10-15 of the Illinois Municipal Code delivers that: ‘The phrases of elected municipal officers shall start at the initially regular or unique meeting of the corporate authorities right after receipt of the official election results from the county clerk of the standard municipal election at which the officers ended up elected, except as normally presented by ordinance fixing the date for inauguration of recently elected officers of a municipality.’”
Since the Metropolis has no ordinance explicitly specifying the inauguration day for Metropolis officials right after the to start with common assembly of the Metropolis Council, Mr. Mullen’s letter stated, the Illinois Municipal Code applies and the new City officers should be sworn it at the initially meeting, at 4:30 p.m. on May 10.
Performing so would make it possible for the recently elected alderpersons (an ordinance allowing a gender-neutral phrase to change “alderman” is also on the agenda) to vote on those people and other agenda goods.
In response to Mr. Mullen’s letter, Corporation Counsel Nicholas Cummings wrote to users of the 80th and 81st Town Councils and both equally the newly elected and retiring Town Clerk, “… the terms of the Council Members of the 80th City Council do not expire right until the stop of four decades and their replacements are the two elected and capable.”
His letter also reported there could be “outstanding inquiries concerning whether any member is indebted to the Metropolis or if there are any prior convictions for selected crimes and no oath has been supplied.”
Mr. Cummings referred the RoundTable to Section 1-5-2 of the Metropolis Code, “Qualifications for Alderman.” The Portion reads as follows:
- No particular person shall be suitable to the business office of Alderman:
- (A) Except if he/she is a qualified elector of the Metropolis and has resided therein at minimum a single yr up coming preceding his/her election
- (B) Until he/she resides within the ward for which he/she is elected 12
- (C) If he/she is in arrears in the payment of any tax or other indebtedness because of the Metropolis or
- (D) If he/she has been convicted in any courtroom found in the United States of any notorious crime, bribery, perjury, or other felony.
- (E) These exceptions to the previously mentioned residency demands based on armed service services, as established forth in 65 ILCS 5/3.1-10-5, shall use. Apart from for the situation of Performing Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem, no Alderman shall be eligible to any place of work of which the income is payable out of the City Treasury, if, at the time of his/her appointment to this sort of an business, he/she is a member of the Town Council, pursuant to 65 ILCS
Mr. Cummings said in his letter he considered that a court would uphold any actions taken by the 80th (present) Metropolis Council, should really they be challenged in court. He added that Ninth Ward Alderman Cicely Fleming has produced a reference to the Principles Committee to set an inauguration day for newly elected Town officials.