Prairie State Wire

Illinois State Board of Elections met March 18.

Here are the minutes provided by the board:

PRESENT: Laura K. Donahue, Vice Chair

Jennifer M. Ballard Croft, Member

Cristina D. Cray, Member

Tonya L. Genovese, Member

Catherine S. McCrory, Member

Rick S. Terven, Sr., Member

Jack Vrett, Member

ABSENT: Casandra B. Watson, Chair

ALSO PRESENT: Jeremy Kirk, Assistant Executive Director

Marni M. Malowitz, General Counsel

Amy L. Calvin, Executive Administrative Assistant

The meeting convened at 10:00 a.m. via videoconference with seven Members present. Vice Chair Donahue and Members Cray, Genovese and Terven were present in Springfield and Members Ballard Croft, McCrory and Vrett were present in Chicago. Chair Watson was absent, and Member Terven held her proxy.

Vice Chair Donahue opened the meeting by leading everyone in the pledge of allegiance.

Member Terven moved to approve the minutes of the February 19 meeting as presented. Member Genovese seconded the motion, which passed by roll call vote of 8-0.

Ms. Malowitz presented and reviewed the settlement offers for agenda items 2.a.1-2.

1) SBE v. Friends of Gina Meeks, 36372, 24MA001; and

2) SBE v. Robb Tadelman for McHenry County Sheriff, 36725, 24AM036. Ms. Malowitz recommended rejection of both offers as the factors in settlement guidelines weigh against acceptance of the offers. Member Cray moved to deny the settlement offers for the above noted matters, which was seconded by Member Ballard Croft and passed by roll call vote of 8-0.

Ms. Malowitz presented and reviewed an appeal of campaign disclosure fines where she concurred with the recommendation of the hearing officer to grant the appeal for agenda item 2.a.3.

3) SBE v. Friends of Carissa Casbon, 34200, 24AS031. Member Cray moved to grant the appeal, which was seconded by Member Terven and passed by roll call vote of 8-0.

Ms. Malowitz presented and reviewed the following appeals of campaign disclosure fines where she concurred with the hearing officer recommendation to deny the appeals for agenda items 2.a.4-10.

6) SBE v. Friends of Jim Tinaglia, 25033, 24AS024. Mr. Tinaglia was present on behalf of the committee and said he was a candidate for Mayor in Arlington Heights. He explained that the person responsible for the filings was undergoing serious health issues and the errors were unintentional. Ms. Malowitz also indicated that that Mr. Tinaglia was not on the ballot forfeiture list and suggested he speak to staff regarding the settlement offer process. Member McCrory moved to deny the appeal, which was seconded by Member Terven and passed by roll call vote of 8-0.

5) SBE v. White County Republican Central Committee, 5564, 24AS012. Ms. Malowitz recommended that the committee be ordered to amend the date of deposit of the contribution on its quarterly report, in addition to denying the appeal. In the event the appeal is denied, the committee is offering $255 to settle $1,020 in fines. Ms. Malowitz then recommended rejection of the settlement offer as the factors in settlement guidelines weigh against acceptance. Member McCrory moved to adopt the recommendation of the General Counsel to deny the appeal, reject the settlement offer and order the committee to file an amended report. Member Terven seconded the motion, which passed by roll call vote of 8-0.

4) SBE v. Richland County Democratic Central Committee, 94, 24AJ002;

7) SBE v. Dundee Township Democrats, 34585, 24AS034;

8) SBE v. Friends of John Monino, 36358, 24AS043;

9) SBE v. Friends of Maria McCarthy for Judge, 39531, 24AS063; and

10) SBE v. Friends of Andy Davis, 39796, 24AS074. Member Cray moved to deny the above noted appeals, which was seconded by Member Terven and passed by roll call vote of 7- 0. Member Vrett recused himself from the vote.

Ms. Malowitz presented and reviewed a complaint following public hearing for agenda item 2.a.11.

11) Katsenes v. Kaspar and Gorman, 23CD041. Ms. Malowitz concurred with the proposed findings, conclusions of law and recommendations of the hearing officer as outlined in the hearing officer’s report. As to Section 9-1.8(c), 10 ILCS 5/9-1.8(c), the recommendation is that no violation occurred as it is a definition that contains no prohibition in it. As to Section 9-2(c), the recommendation is that no violation occurred as the Section does not prohibit the re-activation of the political committee ROOT 22715. However, the respondents did violate Section 9-2(c) by maintaining political committee ROOT 22715. As to Section 9-9.5, no violation occurred as the sample ballot complied with the requirements by including “paid for by” language. The hearing officer recommended that respondents be ordered to file a D-1 form reclassifying ROOT 22715 from a political party committee within 30 days of the date of the board order, and failure to do so will result in a fine not to exceed $5,000. In addition, the hearing officer recommended order to the committee to refrain from engaging in any political activity, beyond filing any quarterly reports as required by Section 9-10, by and through ROOT 22715 until such time as ROOT 22715’s political committee designation is reclassified, and failure to abide by this order would subject ROOT 22715 to a civil penalty not to exceed $5,000 for every instance. Ms. Malowitz noted that the committee did file an amended D-1 form on March 7, 2025, following the public hearing as recommended by the hearing officer, so those recommendations are no longer needed. Ms. Malowitz recommended imposing a 12- month standing order pursuant to Rule 125.420(c), so if the committee filed anything late within the next year, it will be fined more than just the normal fine amounts in an amount up to $5,000 in excess of whatever fine is given. Thomas Condon was present on behalf of the complainant and offered his legal arguments. He indicated that most of the findings were appropriate but did not agree that the committee could correct its violation by reclassifying with the same exact name using a political party’s name within the committee as an appropriate remedy. Pat Kaspar and Liz Gorman were present on behalf of the respondents and offered their oral remarks. They both asked the board to adopt the findings of the hearing officer and General Counsel. Board discussion ensued regarding interpretation of the rules and appropriate legislative remedies. Member Genovese moved to find that no violations of Sections 9-1.8(c) or 9-9.5(c) have been proven. However, respondents violated Section 9-2(c) by maintaining the Respondent committee. And as a result, they should be ordered under Rule 125.420(c) to have a standing order provision for a 12-month period providing that all subsequent reports, statements, or filings required by Article 9 for the next 12 months must be made within the time limits set forth in Article 9, and failure or refusal to comply with those filing deadlines shall result in the imposition of civil penalties by the Board in an amount not to exceed $5,000. Member Cray seconded the motion, which passed by roll call vote of 7-0. Member McCrory abstained from the vote.

Ms. Malowitz presented a list of civil penalty assessments necessitating a final board order for agenda item 2.a.12. Member Cray moved to assess the civil penalties against the committees listed on pages 163-166 of the board packet. Member Ballard Croft seconded the motion, which passed by roll call vote of 8-0.

Next on the agenda was consideration of random audits of political committees and Ms. Malowitz indicated that a memo from Tom Newman, Director of Campaign Disclosure, was included on page 167 of the board packet. She said Mr. Newman is seeking a selection rate of 3% of active political committees, which is the maximum percentage allowed by statute. Member Terven moved to approve the 3% selection rate, which was seconded by Member Ballard Cray and passed by roll call vote of 8-0.

Ms. Malowitz presented a memo from Mr. Newman regarding guidelines for low dollar committees contained on page 168 of the board packet. She said this item was intended to generate discussion to determine if the Board is interested in raising the dollar threshold for low dollar committees. When settling fines, the Board considers whether a committee is low dollar, in which case the Board generally accepts settlements of half of the committee’s outstanding balance rather than half the amount of the fines owed. In 2015, the benchmark for a low-dollar committee was set at $1,000, and the Board has used that $1,000 figure to determine whether a committee is low dollar for the past ten years. Ms. Malowitz noted that since then, inflation has risen approximately 32 percent and fewer committees typically have fund balances that low, even though they are very small with minimal activity. Board discussion was had regarding raising the dollar threshold or increasing the amount by a certain percentage every year to keep up with inflation. The Board requested staff supply information on the number of committees currently considered low dollar and the average balances of those committees. The matter will be placed on the next meeting agenda for discussion and consideration.

A list of payments of civil penalty assessments for agenda item 2.a.15 was presented for informational purposes.

Complaints following closed preliminary hearing were next on the agenda and Ms. Malowitz noted that since the parties were not present for agenda items 2.a.17, that matter could be dismissed for want of prosecution in open session.

17) Vega, Jr. v. Cicero Residents United, 25CD002. Member Vrett moved to dismiss the complaint for want of prosecution. Member Terven seconded the motion, which passed by roll call vote of 8-0.

Member Cray moved to recess to executive session to consider complaints following closed preliminary hearing pursuant to Section 9-21 of the Election Code, 10 ILCS 5/9-21, and Section 2(c)(4) of the Open Meetings Act, 5 ILCS 120/2(c)(4). Member Genovese seconded the motion, which passed by roll call vote of 8-0. The meeting recessed at 11:12 a.m. and reconvened at 12:05 p.m. with the same attendance as noted in the initial roll call.

As to agenda item 2.a.16, Balich v. Homer Township Republican Organization, 24CD018, Member Cray moved to adopt the recommendation of the hearing officer as modified by the General Counsel to find that the allegation under Section 9-10(b) for a late quarterly report was filed on justifiable grounds and should be referred to staff for assessment of penalties. As to the alleged violations of Section 9-11(a)(8) and 9-11(a)(16) regarding loans made by the complainant’s committee, those claims were filed on justifiable grounds and the matter will proceed to a public hearing. And as to all other claims in the complaint, they were not filed on justifiable grounds and should be dismissed. Member Genovese seconded the motion, which passed by roll call vote of 8-0.

As to agenda items 2.a.18-26:

18) Henry v. Keith for Mayor, 25CD005;

19) Henry v. People Over Politics, 25CD006;

20) Henry v. Citizens for Carol McGury, 25CD007;

21) Henry v. Citizens for Nelson Katsenes, 25CD008;

22) Henry v. Citizens for Sean Kampas, 25CD009;

23) Henry v. Citizens for Healy, 25CD010;

24) Henry v. Citizens for Michael R. Milani, 25CD011;

25) Henry v. Citizens for Brian Gaspardo, 25CD012; and

26) Henry v. Citizens for Brian Riordan, 25CD013.

Member Cray moved to adopt the recommendation of the hearing officer and General Counsel to find that the claims were not filed on justifiable grounds and the above noted matters be dismissed as to the extent they are under the Election Code Section 9-1.14. To the extent that violations of laws outside the Election Code are alleged, those items are dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Member Genovese seconded the motion, which passed by roll call vote of 8-0.

As to agenda item 2.a.27, Staack v. Avon United, 25CD034, Member Cray moved to adopt the recommendation of the hearing officer as modified by the General Counsel and further modified by the Board to find that a violation of Section 9-9.5 of the Election Code was filed on justifiable grounds, and that no public hearing is necessary given the admission of missing language. However, the committee is ordered to substantially comply with Section 9-9.5 by adding attribution of source language to its existing signs within three business days of this order. And the committee is further ordered to include attribution of source language under Section 9-9.5 on all future communications as required. Failure to do either of these things will constitute violation of a board order that could result in separate assessments of up to $5,000 for failure to correct existing signs, plus a potential $5,000 for failure to correct future signs erected after today’s date. Member Ballard Croft seconded the motion, which passed by roll call vote of 8-0.

Ms. Malowitz presented and reviewed the proposed administrative rules, Part 300 Automatic Voter Registration and Parts 310 and 311 Joint Rules of the State Board of Elections and the Department of Employment Security contained on pages 171-180 of the board packet. She explained that under Section 1A-16.2 of the Election Code, the Board is required to enter into an interagency contract and jointly adopt rules with several agencies for the purpose of automatic voter registration. Those agencies include the Division of Family and Community Services and Rehabilitation Services of the Department of Human Services, the Department of Employment Security, the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation and the Department of Natural Resources. The purpose of automatic voter registration (AVR) is to make registering to vote easier by making any application filled out with an AVR agency into a dual-purpose application that also functions as an application to register to vote. These rules would permit agencies to participate in AVR in one of three different ways as described starting on page 175 of the board packet. The first would be opt-in AVR, in which the applicant must indicate a desire for their application with another agency to simultaneously operate as a voter registration application. The second option is opt-out AVR, in which an application is a dual-purpose application unless the applicant affirmatively declines. Or third, there is a website transfer version of AVR in which an individual making an application to an AVR agency can be transferred to a pre-filled out online voter registration application to finalize their voter registration. Ms. Malowitz noted that opt-out AVR is not available to an agency unless it collects or cross-references reliable personal information indicating citizenship in the regular course of its application process, which will prevent any erroneous registration by non-citizens. She then asked for a board motion to approve the proposed administrative rules for filing with JCAR. Member Cray moved to approve the proposed rules as presented, which was seconded by Member Terven and passed by roll call vote of 8-0.

Mr. Kirk began the report of the Executive Director with an update on the consolidated elections. The Consolidated Election is on Tuesday, April 1, and staff will be available to provide assistance to the election authorities and general public. Brent Davis, Director of Election Operations, added that the February 25 Consolidation Primary Election was extremely quiet and very few calls were received. Mr. Kirk presented the late precinct report and noted that all nineteen jurisdictions reported their precinct results by 2:00 a.m. A listing of election judge training schools was presented for informational purposes.

The legislative update was next on the agenda and Mr. Kirk said that a listing of elections related legislation was included on pages 183-207 of the board packet. He reported that the Senate appropriation hearing is scheduled for Tuesday, April 15 at 10:00 a.m. and the House appropriation hearing is scheduled for Wednesday, April 30 at 4:00 p.m. Brian Pryor, Senior Policy Advisor said the agency legislative matters were heard in the House Ethics and Elections Committee two weeks ago and things are progressing as expected.

The voter registration activity report, grant funding update, fiscal reports and two year plan of staff activity for the months of March and April were presented for informational purposes.

Member Terven moved to recess to executive session to discuss the appointment, employment, compensation, performance, or dismissal of specific employees, the minutes of the February 19 executive session meeting and pending litigation pursuant to Sections 2(c)(1), 2(c)(11) and 2(c)(21) of the Open Meetings Act, 5 ILCS 120. Member Cray seconded the motion, which passed by roll call vote of 8-0. The meeting recessed at 12:25 p.m. and reconvened at 1:35 p.m. with the same attendance as noted in the initial roll call.

Member Terven moved to approve the February 19 executive session minutes as presented. Member Genovese seconded the motion, which passed by roll call vote of 8-0.

Member Terven moved to re-appoint Tom Newman, Director of Campaign Disclosure, to a three year term. Member McCrory seconded the motion, which passed by roll call vote of 7-1. Member Cray voted in the negative.

With there being no further business before the Board, Member Cray moved to adjourn until Tuesday, April 15, 2025. Member Genovese seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. The meeting ended at 1:37 p.m.

https://www.elections.il.gov/AboutTheBoard/MeetingMinutesAll.aspx