The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27

Thread: Experts say Rahm Emanuel not a legal resident of city

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Wetumpka, AL
    Posts
    2,963

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YardleyLabs View Post
    From s legal perspective,...
    Are you an attorney...particularly one admitted to the Illinois Bar....and specifically specializing in election law? If not, your arguments are merely conjecture and don't have the weight of a legal perspective.

    Illinois law is different from Pennsylvania law which is different from Alabama law which is different from.... This is especially true in the area of election law where each state specifically sets it's own rules. Witnesss Florida in 2000 and 2004 and Minnesota in 2008. The quoted persons in the story are in fact Illinois lawyers and may very well be election law specialists. For instance, there may be a difference in residency for election to office vs residency for voting, paying taxes, and everything else. Dunno.

    Eric

  2. #12
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Johnson View Post
    Are you an attorney...particularly one admitted to the Illinois Bar....and specifically specializing in election law? If not, your arguments are merely conjecture and don't have the weight of a legal perspective.

    Illinois law is different from Pennsylvania law which is different from Alabama law which is different from.... This is especially true in the area of election law where each state specifically sets it's own rules. Witnesss Florida in 2000 and 2004 and Minnesota in 2008. The quoted persons in the story are in fact Illinois lawyers and may very well be election law specialists. For instance, there may be a difference in residency for election to office vs residency for voting, paying taxes, and everything else. Dunno.

    Eric
    And, from the story you posted,
    Actually, Chicago Board of Elections officials have said, with the caveat that they cannot comment on specific cases and they won't know what objections will be raised against mayoral candidates until Nov. 29, that they start with the presumption of intent if a candidate maintains a home in Chicago and votes absentee there.
    "It's the sense of the election board that if you keep ownership of the property, keep your registration there, you've voted absentee, as far as we know he hasn't registered anywhere else, it's just like members of the military who serve overseas in Iraq -- we don't deny them the right to vote; people who take corporate assignments overseas, and lease out their home as a fact of life, it doesn't mean they've left permanently," Chicago Board of Elections spokesman Jim Allen said.
    I think that is pretty much what I stated. As I noted, it will come down to the specifics of the Chicago law. My own experience with residency questions is based on my own experiences and my parents' experiences as non-resident US citizens. My father actually moved from Tennessee to Europe wit his employer in 1960. He remained out of the country in various positions around the world until he retired in 1987, at which point he moved back to Tennessee. Because he never established residency in any other state during that 27 year period, maintained a Tennessee drivers license, and voted absentee in Tennessee, the state considered him to be a resident for that entire time. Their logic was very much that described in the posted article.
    Last edited by YardleyLabs; 10-04-2010 at 07:45 PM.

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Wetumpka, AL
    Posts
    2,963

    Default

    Well, here is what I think they are referring to....

    (65 ILCS 5/6‑3‑9) (from Ch. 24, par. 6‑3‑9)
    Sec. 6‑3‑9. Qualifications of mayor, city clerk, city treasurer and aldermen ‑ Eligibility for other office.
    No person shall be eligible to the office of mayor, city clerk, city treasurer or alderman:
    (1) Unless he is a qualified elector of the municipality and has resided therein at least one year next preceding his election or appointment; or
    (2) Unless, in the case of aldermen, he resides within the ward for which he is elected; or
    (3) If he is in arrears in the payment of any tax or other indebtedness due to the city; or
    (4) If he has been convicted in Illinois state courts or in courts of the United States of malfeasance in office, bribery, or other infamous crime.
    No alderman shall be eligible to any office, except that of acting mayor or mayor pro tem, the salary of which is payable out of the city treasury, if at the time of his appointment he is a member of the city council.
    (Source: P.A. 76‑746.)

    Now, the residency requirement for voting is a mere 30 days.

    Eric

  4. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,347

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Johnson View Post
    http://www.suntimes.com/news/electio...vote04.article

    http://tinyurl.com/2962qbp

    Courts may disagree

    October 4, 2010

    BY ABDON M. PALLASCH Political Reporter/apallasch@suntimes.com
    The first question isn't: Can Rahm win? It's: Can Rahm run?

    Sunday, Rahm Emanuel announced in a video posted on a website that he is preparing to run for mayor of Chicago. But two of Chicago's top election lawyers say the state's municipal code is crystal clear that a candidate for mayor must reside in the town for a year before the election.

    That doesn't mean they must simply own a home in the city that they rent out to someone else. They must have a place they can walk into, keep a toothbrush, hang up their jacket and occasionally sleep, the lawyers say.

    -more-
    For some reason, I can seem to generate much concern over who Chicago elects for their mayor. At least the scumbag isn't in Washington anymore.

  5. #15
    Senior Member dnf777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Western Pa
    Posts
    6,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by depittydawg View Post
    For some reason, I can seem to generate much concern over who Chicago elects for their mayor. At least the scumbag isn't in Washington anymore.
    Hey....its local politics. If they elect him...then they deserve him. I say give Chi-town Rham.....give DC Marion Barry....give NOLA Nagin.
    Nah, I take that back. NOLA deserves much better. thank goodness he's outta there.
    God Bless PFC Jamie Harkness. The US Army's newest PFC, but still our neighbor's little girl!

  6. #16
    Senior Member Buzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Brookings, South Dakota
    Posts
    6,816

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luvmylabs23139 View Post
    Chicago's election for mayor is Feb 22, 2011.
    I had no idea, which could be an indication of how interested I am in that race.
    "For everyone to whom much is given, of him shall much be required." -- Luke 12:48

    Raven - Moneybird's Black Magic Marker***
    (Esprit's Power Play x Trumarc's Lean Cuisine)
    Mick - Moneybird's Jumpin' Jack Flash***
    (Clubmead's Road Warrior x Oakdale Whitewater Devil Dog)
    Peerless - Moneybird's Sole Survivor
    (Two River's Lucky Willie x Moneybird's Black Magic Marker)

  7. #17
    Senior Member M&K's Retrievers's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Royse City, TX
    Posts
    5,197

    Default

    Washington's gain is Chicago's loss.
    M&K's HR UH Tucker of Texoma JH
    M&K's SHR Prime Black Angus
    M&K's Miss Jessie Girl JH
    Sir Jacob of Lakeview-Jake
    Freeway JYD

    Mike Whitworth

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Eastern NC
    Posts
    2,755

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Johnson View Post
    Well, here is what I think they are referring to....

    (65 ILCS 5/6‑3‑9) (from Ch. 24, par. 6‑3‑9)
    Sec. 6‑3‑9. Qualifications of mayor, city clerk, city treasurer and aldermen ‑ Eligibility for other office.
    No person shall be eligible to the office of mayor, city clerk, city treasurer or alderman:
    (1) Unless he is a qualified elector of the municipality and has resided therein at least one year next preceding his election or appointment; or
    (2) Unless, in the case of aldermen, he resides within the ward for which he is elected; or
    (3) If he is in arrears in the payment of any tax or other indebtedness due to the city; or
    (4) If he has been convicted in Illinois state courts or in courts of the United States of malfeasance in office, bribery, or other infamous crime.
    No alderman shall be eligible to any office, except that of acting mayor or mayor pro tem, the salary of which is payable out of the city treasury, if at the time of his appointment he is a member of the city council.
    (Source: P.A. 76‑746.)

    Now, the residency requirement for voting is a mere 30 days.

    Eric

    That could be a problem for someone from the O administration!

  9. #19
    Senior Member road kill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    New Berlin, WI
    Posts
    10,786

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Johnson View Post
    Are you an attorney...particularly one admitted to the Illinois Bar....and specifically specializing in election law? If not, your arguments are merely conjecture and don't have the weight of a legal perspective.

    Illinois law is different from Pennsylvania law which is different from Alabama law which is different from.... This is especially true in the area of election law where each state specifically sets it's own rules. Witnesss Florida in 2000 and 2004 and Minnesota in 2008. The quoted persons in the story are in fact Illinois lawyers and may very well be election law specialists. For instance, there may be a difference in residency for election to office vs residency for voting, paying taxes, and everything else. Dunno.

    Eric
    He is not....he just knows everything.

    Don't believe me??

    Ask him!!


    RK
    Stan b & Elvis

  10. #20
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Johnson View Post
    Well, here is what I think they are referring to....

    (65 ILCS 5/6‑3‑9) (from Ch. 24, par. 6‑3‑9)
    Sec. 6‑3‑9. Qualifications of mayor, city clerk, city treasurer and aldermen ‑ Eligibility for other office.
    No person shall be eligible to the office of mayor, city clerk, city treasurer or alderman:
    (1) Unless he is a qualified elector of the municipality and has resided therein at least one year next preceding his election or appointment; or
    (2) Unless, in the case of aldermen, he resides within the ward for which he is elected; or
    (3) If he is in arrears in the payment of any tax or other indebtedness due to the city; or
    (4) If he has been convicted in Illinois state courts or in courts of the United States of malfeasance in office, bribery, or other infamous crime.
    No alderman shall be eligible to any office, except that of acting mayor or mayor pro tem, the salary of which is payable out of the city treasury, if at the time of his appointment he is a member of the city council.
    (Source: P.A. 76‑746.)

    Now, the residency requirement for voting is a mere 30 days.

    Eric
    As I noted in my answer, I do not think the question of residence is clear one way or the other and could see courts ruling in either direction with justification. It becomes interesting when you look at how the state itself treats questions of residency for income tax purposes. Persons living in Illinois on a temporary or transient basis are not residents and Illinois residents living temporarily or as transients in another location remain Illinois residents.

    Temporary or transitory purposes. Whether or not the purpose for which an individual is in Illinois will be considered temporary or transitory in character will depend upon the facts and circumstances of each particular case. It can be stated generally, however, that if an individual is simply passing through Illinois on his way to another state, or is here for a brief rest or vacation, or to complete a particular transaction, or perform a particular contract, or fulfill a particular engagement, which will require his presence in Illinois for but a short period, he is in Illinois for temporary or transitory purposes, and will not be a resident by virtue of his presence here. If, however, an individual is in Illinois to improve his health and his illness is of such a character as to require a relatively long or indefinite period to recuperate, or he is here for business purposes which will require a long or indefinite period to accomplish, or is employed in a position that may last permanently or indefinitely, or has retired from business and moved to Illinois with no definite intention of leaving shortly thereafter, he is in Illinois for other than temporary or transitory purposes, and, accordingly, is a resident taxable upon his entire net income even though he may also maintain an abode in some other state.
    There is no fixed definition or the length of an assignment that would qualify as permanent rather than temporary. Similarly, in defining domicile, the state places great weight on long term intent. If a person owns a residence, has lived in it, and leaves it for a period of time with the intention of returning ultimately, the residence remains their domicile whether or not they live in it during a particular period. Thus, a temporary lease of a house would not mean that house is no longer a domicile for the owner unless it were done in a manner that made it clear that the long term intent was to leave.

    Obviously, accepting a potentially multi-year temporary assignment in Washington pushes the limits. However, I don't think there was ever any question that Rahm was a resident of Chicago before going to Washington, that his work in Washington was temporary in nature, and that his long term intention was to remain a Chicago resident and return on conclusion of his work in the White House.

    The courts will have to make a judgment based on the facts of the specific case. However, the law does not clearly dictate what that judgment would be. This is clearly what is also said in the "expert" comments made in the articles you cited. It could go either way and will depend on fuzzy questions such as evidence of intent, and not simply be answered by physical location during the prior year or by the fact that the house was leased to someone who would like to stay there.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •