School board candidate removed from ballot after paperclip debate
Yesterday at 4:36 p.m. A member of the Lemont-Bromberek District 113A school board was disqualified Tuesday from running for re-election after an electoral board determined her nominating petitions were not fastened together.
Paul Chialdikas, a Village of Lemont Trustee and school district resident, and Jennifer Albrecht, a district resident with children in the schools, both filed objections against Janet Hughes because her paperwork was not “fastened together in book form” as required by state election law.
The District 113A electoral board – School Board President Lisa Wright, board member John Wood and attorney Nicholas Kefalos, who was appointed in place of a board member running for election – voted unanimously to disqualify Hughes’ candidate petitions after a public hearing. Two of the electoral board members were defendants in a lawsuit that Hughes filed in December.
“I’m disappointed that the voters right to decide who sits on the board has been taken away by two board members who had an interest in the outcome of this hearing,” Hughes said after the public hearing.
Hughes’ attorney, Kory Atkinson, said he is considering the possibility of an appeal. An appeal must be filed within the next five business days, he said.
The electoral board spent close to three hours considering the objections, evidence and the testimonies of Hughes and witnesses, which largely revolved around whether Hughes had used a paperclip to bind her candidate nominating petition papers together, as she claimed.
Chialdikas said Wednesday it was important to him Hughes follow the rules and have her petitions bound.
“Out of the 11 candidates, 10 of them followed procedure,” Chialdikas said.
Chialdikas, who says that he has children going to school in District 113A, wanted to make sure that whoever represents the district knows what they’re doing and understands the electoral process.
He said he has “no bias, whatsoever,” against Hughes and that he checked on every one of the candidates. When asked, Chialdikas said he is not affiliated with any of the defendants in Hughes’ lawsuit.
Hughes filed a lawsuit on Dec. 17 alleging the improper spending of millions of dollars by individual current and former school board members, and district administrators. Defendants named in the lawsuits include Superintendent Timothy Ricker, Wright and Wood. A bonding company and an accounting company are also named in the lawsuits.
In her suit, Hughes alleges that from 2007 through 2010 individual board members improperly spent as much as $12 million out of working cash funds without passing resolutions and without leaving a public record.
The potential bias of the electoral board was brought into question during Tuesday’s public hearing by Hughes’ attorney, who asked to have Wright and Wood replaced, but his request was denied.
Wright, spokeswoman for the school board, when asked to comment on Hughes’ lawsuit following the public hearing, declined to comment.
Wright said that while she is the spokeswoman for the school board, the board’s law firm, Scariano, Himes and Petrarca and its attorneys are spokespersons in matters of litigation. She referred questions to James A. Petrungaro, who also served as moderator for the electoral board public hearings.
Petrungaro, in a phone interview Wednesday, responded to the lawsuit filed against individual and current board members of District 113A, saying, “There’s nothing in the lawsuits that alleges that there’s any money missing from the school district. There’s no allegation of theft or fraud, just accounting mismanagement.”
He added that the school district finds it unfortunate that it is forced to spend its resources to defend lawsuits instead of being able to “use those resources to educate children.”
Paul Chialdikas, a Village of Lemont Trustee and school district resident, and Jennifer Albrecht, a district resident with children in the schools, both filed objections against Janet Hughes because her paperwork was not “fastened together in book form” as required by state election law.
The District 113A electoral board – School Board President Lisa Wright, board member John Wood and attorney Nicholas Kefalos, who was appointed in place of a board member running for election – voted unanimously to disqualify Hughes’ candidate petitions after a public hearing. Two of the electoral board members were defendants in a lawsuit that Hughes filed in December.
“I’m disappointed that the voters right to decide who sits on the board has been taken away by two board members who had an interest in the outcome of this hearing,” Hughes said after the public hearing.
Hughes’ attorney, Kory Atkinson, said he is considering the possibility of an appeal. An appeal must be filed within the next five business days, he said.
The electoral board spent close to three hours considering the objections, evidence and the testimonies of Hughes and witnesses, which largely revolved around whether Hughes had used a paperclip to bind her candidate nominating petition papers together, as she claimed.
Chialdikas said Wednesday it was important to him Hughes follow the rules and have her petitions bound.
“Out of the 11 candidates, 10 of them followed procedure,” Chialdikas said.
Chialdikas, who says that he has children going to school in District 113A, wanted to make sure that whoever represents the district knows what they’re doing and understands the electoral process.
He said he has “no bias, whatsoever,” against Hughes and that he checked on every one of the candidates. When asked, Chialdikas said he is not affiliated with any of the defendants in Hughes’ lawsuit.
Hughes filed a lawsuit on Dec. 17 alleging the improper spending of millions of dollars by individual current and former school board members, and district administrators. Defendants named in the lawsuits include Superintendent Timothy Ricker, Wright and Wood. A bonding company and an accounting company are also named in the lawsuits.
In her suit, Hughes alleges that from 2007 through 2010 individual board members improperly spent as much as $12 million out of working cash funds without passing resolutions and without leaving a public record.
The potential bias of the electoral board was brought into question during Tuesday’s public hearing by Hughes’ attorney, who asked to have Wright and Wood replaced, but his request was denied.
Wright, spokeswoman for the school board, when asked to comment on Hughes’ lawsuit following the public hearing, declined to comment.
Wright said that while she is the spokeswoman for the school board, the board’s law firm, Scariano, Himes and Petrarca and its attorneys are spokespersons in matters of litigation. She referred questions to James A. Petrungaro, who also served as moderator for the electoral board public hearings.
Petrungaro, in a phone interview Wednesday, responded to the lawsuit filed against individual and current board members of District 113A, saying, “There’s nothing in the lawsuits that alleges that there’s any money missing from the school district. There’s no allegation of theft or fraud, just accounting mismanagement.”
He added that the school district finds it unfortunate that it is forced to spend its resources to defend lawsuits instead of being able to “use those resources to educate children.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.