A Cook County Circuit Court judge Monday upheld a village of Oak Park electoral board decision to overrule an appeal to the objection of an advisory referendum question for the Nov. 3 election ballot.
The objection to the question, “Should the state of Illinois repeal laws that ban state investment in businesses that boycott the state of Israel?” was overruled last month by a board consisting of President Vicki Scaman and Trustees James Taglia and Chibuike Enyia. The referendum question was brought forth by Oak Parkers for Free Speech.
In an order issued Monday afternoon, circuit court Judge Viviana Martinez ruled that “the petition for public question substantially complied” with requirements of state election code Section 28-3, which addresses the form of a petition for public question. Thus, the decision of the village’s electoral board “is affirmed.”
Attorney Michael Kasper of the Chicago government-relations law firm Kasper, Holmes & Dring, representing referendum question objectors Alan H. Peres and Piergiorgio Uslenghi, appealed the electoral board’s decision, which brought the matter to Martinez, who took about a week to rule in the matter after a 90-minute hearing Sept. 11.
Late last month, the electoral board overruled the objectors’ appeal that “the circulators’ affidavit did not include an explicit certification that the signatures are ‘genuine,’” i.e., actual use of that specific language, according to the board’s findings and decisions document made available to Wednesday Journal post-hearing.
Whether the objectors and Kasper will file an appeal with state appellate court was not clear Tuesday morning. Kasper did not respond to an interview request.
The group Jewish Community and Friends for Democracy, which is not affiliated with Peres and Uslenghi, declined comment. Dan Goldwin, chief public affairs officer for the Jewish United Fund in Chicago, said he suspects Martinez’s decision will be appealed at the state level.
“I do believe that’s where it’s going to be,” he said. “I’d be surprised if it was otherwise.
“The initial thought is that we support the decision for local Oak Parkers to contest this. We disagree with the decision at the village level; we disagree with the circuit court decision. We’ll let the appeal process play out.”
Conversely, Scaman said she thought Martinez made “the right decision from a legal standpoint.”
“I spent a lot of time reviewing the case law and how the case law verdicts came about and what constitutes a fatal flaw and having the intentions behind those criteria,” she said, “and that’s how I came to the decision that I came to. Democracy has to be our first love and now it’s up to people. It was with great seriousness that I took my role.”
Caren Van Slyke and Jesse Bauer, members of Oak Parkers for Free Speech, applauded the decision.
“(We are) gratified that the judge saw that we had complied with the intent of the law and that we can move forward to take this to the community,” said Van Slyke, who was present for the Sept. 11 hearing.
“When I left there, I really honestly did not know,” Van Slyke said of how she thought Martinez would rule. “She asked a lot of really strong questions to both sides. She had a lot to weigh there.”
She added that the question remaining on the Nov. 3 ballot will generate “great discussion in Oak Park about the need to repeal the anti-boycott law.
“We’re looking forward to having a discussion,” she added. “We haven’t heard anyone say this is a good law, it’s constitutional. That’s the discussion we want to have with the community.”
Bauer said that he was confident Martinez would rule for the electoral board.
“There is no allegation of fraud, and you have a judge that is trying to weigh strict compliance with real harm of disenfranchising voters,” he said.
Oak Parkers for Free Speech recently launched a Facebook page and a video regarding the issue, and Bauer said it is planning to host events in support of the referendum.
“I am heartened by that decision,” said Oak Park resident Deborah Adelman. “It’s good to know that people in the community will have a chance to vote and have their voice be heard.
“What I hope is that the attention this has now received will be met by people engaging in the issue between now and the vote.”