BEFORE THE BOARD OF ELECTION COMMISSIONERS OF THE CITY OF CHICAGO AS THE DULY CONSTITUTED ELECTORAL BOARD ) ) ) Nos, 11-EB-MUN-001, 002, 003, 004, IN REOBIECTIONS TO THECANDIDACY ) 005, 006, 007, 008, 009, 010, 011, 012, OF RAHM EMANUEL, ) 013, 014, 015, 0: ) 021, 022, 023, 024, Respondent-Candidate. } 037, 039, 060, 061 ) ) ) Respondent-Candidate, by his attorneys, respectfully submits this motion to strike’ Petitioners-Objectors’ objections seeking to disqualify Respondent-Candidate on grounds of indebtedness to the municipality.’ For the reasons set forth below, Petitioners-Objectors’ objections should be stricken. I. INTRODUCTION Under Illinois law, “[a] person is not eligible for an elective municipal office if that ” 65 person is in arrears in the payment of a tax or other indebtedness due to the municipality ILCS 5/3.1-10-5(b). Petitioners-Objectors allege that Respondent-Candidate “did not purchase vehicle stickers from his purported residence in 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010” as required by City of Chicago ordinance, and-“thus owes the City of Chicago monies for the vehicle stickers and any penalties accrued because of the non payment of the vehicle stickers.” No, 11-EB-MUN- : While these objections have been consolidated, Respondent-Candidate believes that the “indebtedness” argument is raised or implicated, directly or indirectly, in four objections: Nos. 11-EB-MUN-009, 011, 024, and (039, In any event, Respondent-Candidete directs this motion to any objection which raises an indebtedness argument.024 Petition at 11. Based on this supposed nonpayment, Respondent-Candidate allegedly “is indebted to the City of Chicago and not legally qualified to hold office.” Id. "This argument fails for two independent reasons. First, Respondent-Candidate is not “in arrears in the payment of a tax or other indebtedness due to the municipality,” 65 ILCS 5/3.1-10- 5(b), because there is no actual indebtedness to the City evidenced by the failure to pay a City- issued fine, tax bill, or other determination of financial liability. Second, there could not be such ‘an indebtedness to the City because Respondent-Candidate complied fully with Chicago Municipal Code § 3-56-020 by obtaining a vehicle sticker covering all periods of time during which his vehicle made use of the city streets or city-owned property. These objections accordingly should be stricken. Il, RELEVANT FACTS 1. Respondent-Candidate has no outstanding fine, penalty, or judgment owing to the City of Chicago. 2. Chicago vehicle stickers run from July 1 to June 30 of the specified years. 3, Respondent-Candidate's spouse purchased 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 vehicle stickers for vehicles registered to Respondent-Candidate. Amy Rule Affidavit. 4, Respondent-Candidate’s sole vehicle left Chicago prior to June 30, 2009, the date on which the 2008-2009 vehicle sticker expired. Amy Rule Affidavit. : 5. Respondent-Candidate’s vehicle has not been driven on Chicago city streets or city-owned property from July 1, 2009, through the present. Amy Rule Affidavit. 6. Respondent-Candidate’s spouse purchased a 2010-2011 vehicle sticker in October 2010, Amy Rule Affidavit.UL ARGUMENT “The objector in an electoral board proceeding has the burden of proving the objection by fa preponderance of the evidence, and relief will be denied if this burden is not sustained. Ramirez v, Andrade, 372 U1.App.3d 68, 74 (Ist Dist. 2007). “Courts in Illinois and elsewhere, including decisions of the United States Supreme Court, have clearly enunciated a rule of law that where doubts exist, such doubts are to be resolved in favor of ballot access.” Seskind v. Levin, No. 94-EB-REP-08, CEBC, Jan. 25, 1994. Petitioners-Objectors fall far short of meeting this burden. A person is not “in arrears in the payment of a tax or other indebtedness due to the municipality,” 65 ILCS 5/3.1-10-5(b), unless there is an actual debt. To be in arrears in the payment of an indebtedness, Respondent-Candidate must have (1) actually been subjected to a fine, notice of judgment, or similar determination of financial liability, and (2) failed to pay that sum in a timely manner, Petitioners-Objectors fail to cite any such actual fine or similar determination of indebtedness issued to Respondent-Candidate. Respondent-Candidate is unaware of any application of this statute to alleged debts that have not yet been the subject of a specific demand for payment by the municipality. See Cinkus v, Vill. Of Stickney Mun. Officers Electoral Bd., 228 Il.2d 200 (2008) (candidate ruled ineligible to run for office, pursuant to 65 ILCS 5/3.1-10-5(b), after petitioner presented $100 unpaid “Notice of Judgment Entered” against candidate). Applying the statute outside the context of debts as to which the municipality has made a specific demand on the candidate for payment would open the door to uncertainty—and, could result in the disqualification of candidates who have not even received notice of the indebtedness. That would make the provision a trap for the unwary, with the penalty imposed upon the public. The statute therefore cannot be invoked here,Moreover, it is no surprise that Petitioners-Objectors cannot present an actual notice of indebtedness issued by the City of Chicago: Respondent-Candidate complied with the City's vehicle sticker ordinance. Chicago Municipal Code § 3-56-020 makes it “unlawful for any motor vehicle owner residing within the city 10 use, or to cause or permit any of the owner's agents, employees, lessees, licensees or bailees, to use, any motor vehicle or any other vehicle upon the public ways of the city or upon any city-owned property, unless such vehicle is licensed as provided in this chapter.” (emphasis added). For the years 2007-2008 and 2008-2009, a vehicle sticker was obtained for Respondent Candidate's vehicle. See Amy Rule Affidavit, From late June 2009 through the present, streets or upon city-owned Respondent-Candidate's vehicle was never used on Chicago cit property. Id. By the plain language of the statute, a vehicle sticker was not required for this period. (On October 27, 2011 a 2010-2011 vehicle sticker was purchased for the vehicle, even though his vehicle remains outside of Chicago, because the vehicle may return to Chicago prior to July 1, 2011. Amy Rule Affidavit.) TV. CONCLUSION Respondent-Candidate is not “in arrears in the payment of a tax or other indebtedness due to the municipality.” 65 ILCS 5/3.1-10-5(b). Petitioners-Objectors fail to identify any actual unpaid debt, issued penalty, unsatisfied Notice of Judgment, or the like, that has been issued against Respondent-Candidate but not paid. Even if the failure to purchase a vehicle sticker could qualify as an “indebtedness due to the municipality’—which it cannot—the objection would still fail. Petitioners-Objectors’ unsupported allegation that Respondent-Candidate failed to purchase vehicle stickers, and is therefore indebted to the City of Chicago, is contradicted by clear evidence that Respondent-Candidate did obtain vehicle stickers (Amy Rule Affidavit and accompanying exhibits) as well as by the plain language of the vehicle sticker ordinance, which requires vehicle stickers only when a vehicle actually is used on city streets or city-owned property. For these reasons, Respondent-Candidate respectfully urges the Board to strike Petitioners-Objectors’ petitions to disqualify Candidate on grounds of indebtedness to the municipality. WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, Respondent-Candidate respectfully prays that these Objections be stricken, Respectfully submitted, Rahm Emanuel (One of his Afte Michael J. Kasper 222 N. LaSalle, Suite 300 ‘Chicago, IL 60601 312.704.3292 312.368.4944 (Fax) Kevin M. Forde Kevin M. Forde, Ltd. 111 W. Washington St., Suite 1100 Chicago, IL 60602 312.641.1441 312.641.1288 (Fax) Michael K. Forde Mayer Brown LLP 71S, Wacker Drive Chicago, IL 60606 312.701.8807 312.706.8631 (Fax)ADDENDUM Chicago Municipal Code § 3-56-020: License required. It shall be unlawful for any motor vehicle owner residing within the city to use, or to cause or permit any of the owner's agents, employees, lessees, licensees or bailees, to use, any motor vehicle or any other vehicle upon the public ways of the city or upon any city-owned property, unless such vehicle is licensed as provided in this chapter. Trailers are exempted from this license requirement. There shall be a presumption that any vehicle parked in any public garage, as defined in Chapter 4-232, or any parking lot open to pedestrian traffic, used the public ‘ways to arrive at its location, Commercial motor vehicles, as defined in Section 1-111.8 of the Illinois Vehicle Code, codified as 625 ILCS 5/1-111.8, as amended, which are registered pursuant to the International Registration Plan shall be exempt from the licensing requirements of this chapter. ‘The owner of a motor vehicle or any other vehicle who resides in the city but maintains a situs or base of such vehicle located outside of the city shall be entitled to a credit against the appropriate license fee provided for herein in the amount of any wheel tax license fee paid for such vehicle to the municipality where such vehicle is based; provided, however, that in no event shall the license fee be reduced to an amount less then* the wheel tax license fee for passenger automobiles. * Editor's note — As set forth in Coun. J. 7-2-97, p. 48683, § 2; correct language appears to be “...less than the wheel tax....”” It shall be unlawful for any person under the age of 16 years to operate on the streets of the city a motorcycle, powercycle, bicycle with motor attached, or power scooter, with a produces not to exceed five brake horsepower. No person shall operate a motor vehicle as set forth in this chapter without said vehicle being duly licensed as prescribed herein. The operator of any such motor vehicle shall be subject to the same penalties as the owner for the violation of any of the terms of this ordinance. (Prior code § 29-2; Amend Coun. J. 4-6-90, p. 13691; Amend Coun. J. 12-15-92, p. 27387, Amend Coun. J. 7-2-97, p. 48683, § 2; Amend Coun. J. 11-19-03, p. 14216, § 3.2; ‘Amend Coun, J. 2-8-06, p. 69782, § 1; Amend Coun. J, 12-12-07, p. 16793, § 1) saysBEFORE THE BOARD OF ELECTION COMMISSIONERS OF THE CITY OF ‘CHICAGO AS THE DULY CONSTITUTED ELECTORAL BOARD THOMAS L. MCMAHON, etal. ) ) Petitioner-Objector ) ) % Nos. 11-EB-MUN-024,11-EB-MUN-9, )1-EB-MUNG-I1, 11-BB-MUN-39 ) RAHM EMANUEL, 2 ) Respondent-Candidate ) ) AFFIDAVIT OF AMY RULE AMY RULE, being duly swom on oath, on personal knowledge, hereby deposes, and states as follows: 1. Tam married to Rahm Emanuel. 2, During the period, July 1, 2007, through June 30, 2008, our family leased one automobile, a 2006 Cadillac SRX. 3. purchased a 2007-2008 City of Chicago vehicle sticker for that automobile at the Montrose Ravenswood Currency Exchange, 1808 W. Montrose Ave., Chicago, IL, 60613. 4. Our family leased the 2006 vehicle for most of the period July 1, 2008 to June 30, 2009; after that lease terminated we purchased, in May 2009, a 2009 Mercury Mariner. 5. purchased a 2008-2009 City of Chicago vehicle sticker for these vehicles at the Montrose Ravenswood Currency Exchange. Attached as Exhibit A is a picture of that sticker on the 2009 Mercury Mariner's windshield. 6. Inone or both of these years I purchased the sticker late, after receiving tickets because the vehicle did not have a current sticker. Each year, I paid the tickets in full and purchased a sticker. 7. The 2008-2009 City of Chicago vehicle sticker on the Mercury Mariner expired on June 30, 2009. 8, [left Illinois, with the Mercury Mariner, im June 2009.9, ‘The car has not been driven on Chicago city strets or city-owned property since June 2009. 10, I purchased a 2010-2011 City of Chicago vehicle sticker for the Mercury Mariner, Attached as Exhibit B is a proof of purchase for that sticker. Dated: December “$2010 bg Bale Sworn to before me this L_ day of December, 2010 Notary Public iE. JEROME BROWN sof Coke Sry a OA eri {Uy Comission ExesBEFORE THE DULY CONSTITUTED ELECTORAL BOARD FOR THE HEARING AND PASSING UPON OF OBJECTIONS. ‘TO MUNICIPAL OFFICES IN THE CITY OF CHICAGO. WALTER P. MAKSYM, JR. and THOMAS L. MCMAHON Petitioner-Objectors, v No. 1-EB-MUN-D10 RAHM EMANUEL, d ) ) ) ) ) ) d ) Respondent-Candidate. PETITIONER-OBJECTOR’S REQUEST FOR PRODU N OF DOCUMENTS NOW COMES Petitioner-Objectors WALTER MAKSYM and THOMAS MCMAHON, (collectively, the “Objectors”), by and through their attomeys ODELSON & STERK, LTD... hereby requests that Respondent-Candidate Rahm Emanuel produce and/or permit the Objectors to inspect and copy all documents and tangible things described in these requests which are in possession, custody or control of the Candidate or any agent of the Candidate. [DEFINITIONS A. As used herein, the term “Candidate”, "you", "your" shall mean RAM EMANUEL, AMY RULE, collectively or individually and theirs past or present agents, employees, and representatives. B. As used herein, the term "document" shall mean any writing or other tangible thing used for storing or recording information of any nature, including but not limited to drafts and notes, now or at any time having been in Plaintiffs possession, custody or control. Further, “documents” shall also mean any written, printed, typed, recorded or graphic matter of any kind, description or nature, including copies of documents that are not identical duplicates of the originals, within the possession. custody or control of the Candidate, its employees, agents,attlomeys, accountants or associated persons. "Documents" include, without limitation, all ‘writings, emails, letters, reports, correspondence, memoranda, or notes of meetings or conversations or of telephone calls. recordings of conversations, either in writing or upon any mechanical electrical device, stenographic or handwritten notes, records, books, work papers, reports. telegrams, studies, maps, surveys, manuals, contracts, agreements, publications, minutes, pamphlets, pictures, films, video tapes. checks, orders, invoices, receipts. transcripts or statistical computations, ‘As used herein, the terms "and" as well as “or” shall be used either disjunctively information which or conjunctively as necessary to bring within the scope of this Request any might otherwise be construed to be outside their scope. D. As used herein, the term “person” shall mean any individual, corporation, partnership, joint venture, timited partnership, association or other entity, business or otherwise. E. The term “Property” shall mean 4226, 4228 or 4232 North Hermitage, Chicago, Hlinois 60613. F. The term “relating or “relate” shall mean: pertaining, describing, referring, evidencing, reflecting, discussing, showing, supporting, contradicting, refuting, constituting. embodying, containing, conceming, identifying, or in any way logically or factually connected with the matter discussed. INSTRUCTIONS A. For each Request, you are hereby requested to produce all documents which refer to the information sought by the Request or contained in your answer. Please identify and attach any such documents to your answers. It is sufficient to produce legible, complete and exact copies (including any notations thereon) of documents as Jong as the original documents areretained and will be made available if requested. If you know of the existence of documents containing information requested by the Request or contained in your response, but those documents are not within your possession, custody or control, please describe the document, state its location and identify the custodian of the document. B. This Request is continuing in nature. so as to require Plaintiffs to supplement this Request as additional documents become available or are discovered, With respect to the identity of any documents which are claimed to be privileged, identify each document, stating where applicable: y 2 3) 7) 5) 6) 2n 8) » 10) m ‘The name and ttle or position of the sender of the documer ‘The name and title or position of the author of the document; The name and title or position of each and every person to whom the document was sent; ‘The name and title or position of each and every person who, to Plaintiffs” knowledge after reasonable inquiry, has seen a copy of the document; ‘The name and title or position of each and every person stated on the document as receiving a copy of the document; The name and title or position of each and every person who to Plaintiffs? knowledge after reasonable inguiry has received a copy of the document; ‘The date of the document; A brief description of the subject matter of the document; The date on which the document was received by those having possession ‘of the document; The statue, rule or decision which is claimed to give rise to the privilege: The name and title or position of each and every person having knowledge of the factual basis on which the privilege is asserted; and,12) The names and title or position of each person on whose behalf the privilege is asserted, D. Im recognition of the confidential information that may be contained in the documents requested, the Candidate may redact such confidential information that does not pertain to issues of residency; however, under no circumstances, shall the Candidate be permitted to redact addresses or similar information, REQUESTS 1, Any and all documents that in any way relate to a lease agreement for the Property between the Candidate, including Amy Rule, and Robert and Lori Halpin. 2. Any and all documents that in any way relate to the Candidate's, including Amy Rule, property interest in the. property commonly identified as 3407 Woodley Road N.W., Washington D.C. 20016, including but not limited to warranty deeds, quitelaim deeds, option agreements, real estate leases or lease/purchase agreements. 3. Any and all documents that in any way relate to the Candidate's, including Amy Rule, attempt to acquire @ property interest in any other property between 2008 and the present, including but not limited to warranty deeds, quitelaim deeds, option agreements, real estate leases or lease/purchase agreements. 4. Any and all documents or communications that in any way relate 10 a sale or lease of, or a contemplation to sell or lease, the Property between 2008 and present. 5. Any and all documents or communications between the Candidate, including Amy Rule, and Paul Levy that in any way relate to a sale of. or a contemplation to sell, the Property between 2008 and present.6. Any and all documents or communic neluding but not limited to any broker listing agreement for the sale of the Property, belwven the Candidate, including Amy Rule, and Charlotte Newburger and/or Prudential Rubloff Properties between 2008 and present, 7. Provide any and all registration forms and/or school entrance applications, whether public or private, submitted by members of the Candidate's household from 2008 to present. In responding to this request, please see Instruction D. 8 Any and all documents or communications that evidence a vehicle(s) owned or leased by the Candidate, including Amy Rule, which is, or was. registered in the District of Columbia between 2008 to present. 9. Any and all documents or communications that evidence @ vehicle(s) owned or leased by the Candidate, including Amy Rule, which is, or was, registered in the City of Chicago between 2008 to present. 10. Any and all documents or communications that evidence a District of Columbia Driver's License issued to the Candidate, including Amy Rule, between 2008 and present, including but not limited to the Driver's License application as well as the actual driver's license. 11, Any and all documents or communications that evidence an Illinois Driver's License issued to the Candidate, including Amy Rule, between 2008 and present, including but not limited to the Driver's License application as well as the actual driver's license. 12. Any and all documents or communications that evidence a Residential Parking Permit issued to the Candidate, including Amy Rule, by the District of Columbia between 2008 and Present, including but not limited to che Residential Parking Permit application as well as the a copy of the Residential Parking Permit.13. Any and all documents or communications that evidence a Reciprocity Permit tor Temporary Residents issued to the Candidate, including Amy Rule, by the District of Columbia between 2008 and present, including but not limited to the Reciprocity Permit for Temporary Residents application as well as u copy of the Reciprocity Permit for Temporary Residents. 14. Provide the Candidate's, as well as Amy Rule's, W-2 Forms for tax years 2008 through present. 15, Any and all documents or communications related to a District of Columbia income tax return, including but not limited to the actual income tax return, of the Candidate, including ‘Amy Rule, during tax years 2008 through present. 16. Any and all documents or communications related to a State of Illinois income tax retum, including but not limited to the actual income tax retum, of the Candidate, including Amy Rule, during tax years 2008 through present. 17. Any and all documents or communications related to a federal tax return, including the actual income tax retum, of the Candidate, inchiding Amy Rule, during tax years 2008 through present. 18, Any and all documents or communications relating to the Candidate's, including Amy Rule's, filing of the District of Columbia’s Form D-4 Employce Withholding Allowance Centticate during tax years 2008 through present. 19. Any and all documents or communications relating to the Candidate’s, including Amy Rule’s, filing of the District of Columbia's Form D-4A Certificate of Nonresidence in the District of Columbia during tax years 2008 through present,20. Any and all documents or communications relating to home insurance policies, including the actual insurance policies, procured by the Candidate, including Amy Rule, for the Property between 2008 and present. 21. Any and all documents or communications relating to home insurance policies or renter insurance policies procured by the Candidate, including Amy Rule, for the property commonly identified as 3407 Woodley Road N.W., Washington D.C. 20016 between 2008 and present 22. Any and all vehicle insurance policies procured by the Candidate, including Amy Rule, between 2008 and present 23. Any and all utility bills, including gas, clectric and water, received by the Candidate, including Amy Rule, regarding the Property between 2008 and present. 24. Any and all utility bills, including gas. electric and water, received by the Candidate, including Amy Rule, regarding the property commonly identified as 3407 Woodley Road N.W., Washington D.C. 20016 between 2008 and present 25. Any and all telephone, cellular telephone, television, and intemet bills received by the Candidate, including Amy Rule, between 2008 and present. 26. Any and all credit card billing statements received by the Candidate, i cluding Amy Rule, between 2008 and present. 27. Any and all bank statements, including but not limited to investment banking statements, received by the Candidate, including Amy Rule, between 2008 and present. 28. Any and all documents relating to the Candidate’s, or Amy Rule's, voter registration ‘cards between 2008 and present29. Any and all documents or communication provided to the Chicago Board of Elections by the Candidate, including Amy Rule, to reinstate the Candidate. including Amy Rule, from inaetive status on the voter rolls from 2008 through present 30. Any and all documents filed with the United States Postal Service regarding a change of address of the Candidate, including Amy Rule, between 2008 and present. 31. Any and all documents relating to the receipt and payment of property tax bills by the Candidate, including Amy Rule, for the Property between 2008 and present 32. Any and all documents relating to the receipt and payment of property tax bills by the Candidate, including Amy Rule, for the property commonly identified as 3407 Woodley Road N.1W., Washington D.C. 20016 between 2008 and present. 33. Any and all employment paycheck stubs received by Candidate, including Amy Rule, between 2008 and present. 34. Any and all documents relating to any homeowner's exemption received by the Candidate, including Amy Rule, against their property tax assessment from 2008 through present. 35. Any and all documents related to the acquisition and/or renewal of license plates for vehicles owned or leased by the Candidate, including Amy Rule, from 2008 through present. 36. Any and all documents or communications, including but not limited to any broker listing agreement for the sale or lease of the Property, between the Candidate, including Amy Rule, and Urban Real EstateRespectfully Submitted, WALTER P, MAKSYM. JR. and THOMAS L. MCMAHON, Petitioner-Objectors. By: OE ‘One of their attorneys Burton 8. Odelson, Matthew Welch ODELSON & STERK, LTD. 3318 W. 93" St Evergreen Park, IL. 60805 (708) 424-5678