* This Tribune story got lost in the shuffle yesterday with all the Tim Mapes coverage…
House Speaker Michael Madigan’s legal team on Tuesday asked a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit brought by a former campaign worker who alleged she lost a chance to move up in the powerful Democratic leader’s political organization because she reported that a top aide sexually harassed her.
The request was made as part of a court filing in which the Madigan-chaired Democratic Party of Illinois denied a series of allegations brought by Alaina Hampton. She contends she was retaliated against after she lodged complaints that Madigan lieutenant Kevin Quinn harassed her through phone calls and inappropriate texts. […]
In the Tuesday response to the suit, Madigan’s legal team contended Hampton had failed to establish that an “employment relationship existed” between her and the party during the “relevant time period.” Hampton has said she was harassed by Kevin Quinn during the 2016 campaign season and up through the time she spoke to Ald. Quinn in February 2017.
The speaker’s lawyers said Hampton was paid for limited time periods in 2012 from a political fund controlled by Madigan’s House Democrats, for a time in 2014 from the speaker’s own political fund, and again in 2016 from both of the funds.
* I asked Hampton for a response…
“Speaker Madigan’s legal team has been searching for ways to undermine and discredit me and my story since day one–so their motion to dismiss should come as no surprise.
“So much for the Speaker’s empty words praising my courage in coming forward. For all of his talk about taking responsibility and demanding accountability for those around him, it’s clear that their primary goal is to protect their own grip on power–at all costs.
“The Speaker’s legal strategy is a clear effort to send a message to me and other women. They want us to be afraid to come forward. They want us to continue to fear that people will think our experiences are invalid. But the fact is, it is now clear to everyone that harassment in the Speaker’s organization is pervasive and systemic.
“To other victims–don’t let this motion to dismiss discourage you. Now is the time for women to say we won’t tolerate it any longer.”
* Related…
* Madigan opposes release of 2014 IG report discussing clout, says not relevant to suit over ’sham candidates’
A faction of Southern Illinois University’s board of trustees may move to oust the system’s embattled president this week, an extraordinary move that came about without the president’s knowledge and intensifies weeks of tension at the schools.
Two members of the SIU board’s executive committee have convened a meeting for Friday to consider two items: “administrative leave of president” and “appointment of acting president,” according to the meeting notice. […]
[Executive committee member Joel Sambursky], in an emailed statement, alluded to some new information trustees received since their regular meeting last week that necessitated the unplanned meeting. But he would not be specific. […]
“I think it’s an attempt by a couple of board members to control the entire board, and I find that to be distasteful,” [board chairwoman, Amy Sholar] said. “It is extremely frustrating, and it’s not the way to govern.”
SIUE Chancellor Randy Pembrook said in an interview that he thinks removing the university president “seems to go beyond” what the executive committee was created to do.
“If this is an outcome of asking the allocation question, I just don’t think it is a just use of the bylaws,” Pembrook said. He acknowledged that Dunn’s use of the term “bitchers” in the email “ratcheted up the heat” in the conversation about how the university system distributes its state cash.
But Pembrook said Dunn and Sholar have “provided good leadership” in the last year. He is concerned that the conversation might not continue if Dunn is gone.
“He has been a champion of that question in a way that previous presidents have not,” Pembrook said.
According to the meeting notice sent out Wednesday afternoon, the special executive session meeting will be held at 1:30 p.m. Friday in Ballroom A of the SIU Carbondale Student Center.
Dunn came under fire in May after a guest opinion column in The Southern Illinoisan questioned the system president’s handling of a recent state funding reallocation proposal. […]
State Reps. Terri Bryant, R-Murphysboro, and Natalie Phelps Finnie, D-Elizabethtown, have both called for Dunn’s resignation.
Dunn’s contract was renewed in 2017 and extends through June 30, 2022. He makes an annual salary of $430,000. The meeting notice suggests a temporary change of leadership, but if the board terminates his contract without cause, the university will have to pay Dunn the equivalent of three years’ annual base salary, or $1.3 million.
*** UPDATE *** Press release…
SIU Board Chair Amy Sholar Declares Executive Committee Does Not Have Authority to Remove Dunn or Appoint Replacement
Following the announcement by SIU Board Trustees J. Phil Gilbert and Joel Sambursky to call an emergency meeting of the Board’s executive committee to oust President Dunn and appoint an unnamed replacement, Board Chair Amy Sholar declared the executive committee does not have any such authority given the circumstances.
Sholar stated “I’ve reviewed the Bylaws for the SIU Board of Trustees and, under these circumstances, I am not convinced the executive committee has the authority to remove President Dunn or appoint anyone as a replacement. Also, I do not believe that the matter is so urgent that an executive committee meeting is permissible for the purposes stated by these trustees. Further, I do not believe the executive committee has the authority to remove President Dunn and effectively undo an action previously taken by the full Board in hiring him. Lastly, as the Chair has the authority to interpret and apply the bylaws between meetings, it is my decision that the executive committee cannot meet for the purposes stated in the call for the meeting for the above reasons.”
As to whether the executive committee can unilaterally hire or fire a President, Sholar referred to the bylaws. “Article IV, Section 1 clearly states ‘At least one-half of the total membership of the Board shall be required for the initial selection of the President or the termination of the President’s services.’ While these two trustees are attempting to get around this rule by merely placing President Dunn on leave rather than an outright termination, the executive committee clearly does not have the ability to make the selection of a President, which I contend includes any interim President holding such powers. Our rules clearly contemplate that the full Board should make such an important decision, rather than a small faction thereof,” said Sholar.
Sholar further cited Article III, which states ‘The Executive Committee functions as an instrument of the Board and shall possess all the powers of the Board when in session, provided that it shall not overrule, revise, or change the previous acts of the Board…’ Sholar affirmed, “As it was the full Board that hired President Dunn, for the executive committee to relieve him and appoint a replacement would effectively undo a previous action of the Board, which is beyond the limited powers of this committee and would not proper in my judgment.”
Sholar also questioned the urgency of the meeting, which was abruptly announced less than one week after a special meeting of the full Board. “The bylaws, at Article III, provide for only urgent matters to be taken up by the executive committee. While Trustee Gilbert and Sambursky are attempting to satisfy the urgency standard by citing new evidence, they certainly have not shared it with me. Further, they did not consult with me on the need for a meeting, the subject matter, the location, or the date before calling it on their own. If this issue truly cannot wait until the next regular meeting I would gladly call a special meeting to occur in the very near future so the full Board can vote on whether President Dunn should be relieved. I find it contrary to both the letter and spirit of our bylaws for these two trustees to attempt to remove the President unilaterally without the votes or discussion of the full Board,” said Sholar.
Sholar asserted that she, as Chair, has the authority to decide the meaning and application of the bylaws between meetings. She stated “Article II, Section 3 states ‘The Chair shall have authority to decide any disputes as to the application or meaning of the Bylaws …, but any such decision shall be referred to the next regular or special meeting of the Board for final judgment and adjudication by the Board.’ Therefore, it is my decision that the executive committee does not have the authority to appoint an interim President or even to relieve the current President of his duties as such powers are reserved to the full Board per Article IV and would undo a prior action of the Board. I also do not believe that this matter, which was discussed at the special meeting last week, is now so urgent that we must call an emergency meeting even if the executive committee had the authority to make these decisions. If Trustees J. Phil Gilbert and Joel Sambursky disagree with me then we should have a special meeting at which not only this decision but the underlying issue itself can be discussed and voted on by the full Board. Until then, it is my decision as Chair that the bylaws do not permit the executive committee to take the proposed actions for the reasons stated, and if a meeting is held and a vote taken any such action would be invalid,” said Sholar.
Sholar added, “It truly baffles me that these two trustees, both representing the Carbondale campus, would attempt to exclude the full Board from participating in this important issue after we approved a policy just last week that we would advocate for keeping the SIU system together. The power play by these two trustees is not only improper but also serves to further drive a wedge between our campuses at a time when all of us should be working together to ease tensions. If a decision is to be made on President Dunn’s future at SIU it should be made by the full Board and not by two trustees representing one campus attempting to push through an action they suspect would not pass if presented to the full Board.”
The governor needs to step in here. These are mostly his trustees, after all.
* The New York Times becomes the latest in a long line of national publications to profile Republican moneybags Dick Uihlein…
The Uihlein forces drew sharp criticism for a recent television ad from the campaign of Jeanne Ives, the conservative challenger they backed in a primary against Gov. Bruce Rauner of Illinois. The ad featured a cartoonish depiction of a transgender woman, highlighting Mr. Rauner’s support for a bill permitting people to change the gender on their birth certificates.
“It was probably the most offensive thing I’ve seen in a state race,” said Pat Brady, the former Illinois Republican chairman.
Mr. Uihlein said he “had no involvement with the ad,” and the couple said, “We value diversity in our community and at Uline.” […]
Mr. Uihlein is the largest donor to Mr. Proft’s Liberty Principles PAC, which supports hard-right candidates and funded more than a dozen publications resembling newspapers, with names like North Cook News and East Central Reporter. […]
Mr. Brady, the former Illinois Republican Party leader, suggested that Mr. Uihlein was an easy mark for political operatives; he also criticized Mr. Proft and his associates for spending Mr. Uihlein’s money wildly on long shots.
“They’ve just given him such bad advice that it makes him look kind of goofy, and he’s not: He’s a serious guy,” Mr. Brady said. “These guys are making hundreds of thousands of dollars off him.” […]
In his responses, Mr. Uihlein said he had long worked with Mr. Proft and [John Tillman of the Illinois Policy Institute] “advancing conservative principles” and believed “they have both done so admirably.”
* From Democratic state Reps. Kelly Burke, Deb Conroy and Ann Williams…
Yesterday, we heard from longtime statehouse employee Sherri Garrett about the inappropriate behavior she faced as an employee of the Illinois House – the latest in a series of allegations about harassment, retaliation and bullying behavior in and around Illinois government and politics.
The resignation of Speaker Madigan’s Chief of Staff Tim Mapes was the right decision in the wake of yesterday’s allegations, and we commend Ms. Garrett and all the others who shared their stories in an effort to bring positive change to our work environment. But the problem is much bigger than any one individual, regardless of what position they hold. Each allegation, each story shared publicly or privately, add up to one conclusion: the culture surrounding Illinois government and politics must change.
As members of the Illinois House Democratic Women’s Caucus, we recommend an independent investigation to review all operations of the House of Representatives, including the Office of the Speaker. We have a responsibility to ensure not only an impartial, fair and transparent process for the adjudication of complaints, but also to change the culture that has permitted inappropriate behavior to flourish.
Additionally, the House Democratic Women’s Caucus will launch a powerful new program, called “Representing Respect” – developed to create change and impact the workplace culture in a much different way than a typical harassment training.
• This interactive program, which was developed by law firm Seyfarth Shaw and called “Seyfarth Shaw at Work,” is results- and data-driven. It has been utilized by many Fortune 500 companies to establish core values and educate team members as to how interpersonal interactions should reflect these values. (See link, below.)
• The Illinois Legislature would be first in the country to adopt this sort of dynamic training, and the program will be tailored to reflect the realities of working in a non-traditional environment like the Capitol. We thank Asst. Majority Leader Sara Feigenholtz for leading the effort to facilitate the development of this program for our own Caucus and for spearheading efforts to move forward with this project, and Majority Leader Barbara Currie for her strong leadership of the Sexual Harassment Task Force.
• Several House members have participated in an abbreviated version of the program, and we plan to pilot the complete program later this summer with our Democratic colleagues in the House and recommend it be provided to all staff in the fall.
We are committed to working to improve our workplace environment for all women – and men - who work in and around the Capitol in any capacity. We believe we can make a real difference and hope our colleagues in all other caucuses will consider participating.
Former Gov. Pat Quinn has launched a petition drive to impose a term limit for Chicago mayors and create an elected consumer advocate position.
The Chicago Democrat announced efforts Sunday, tipping his hat to his past signature drives.
If he gets enough signatures, the two referendums could be on ballots as early as November. However, Quinn says getting nearly 53,000 valid signatures before an Aug. 8 [2016] deadline would be challenging.
The petition calls for a two-term maximum. If approved in time, Mayor Rahm Emanuel wouldn’t be eligible to seek a third term in 2019.
“We need 100,000 signatures by the filing deadline August 6 to get the referendum on the November 6 ballot — and we are halfway there already with 50,000 signatures,” [Pat Quinn] said.
So, he’s managed to collect 50,000 signatures in two years and now he wants to double that number in the next two months?
* Media advisory…
UPDATED: ADVISORY: PAT QUINN: Grassroots Petition Drive for Nov. 6 Binding Referendum to Term Limit Chicago’s Mayor Passes Halfway Mark in Signatures
WHEN: Thursday, June 7, 11 am
WHERE: Methodist Temple – 2nd Floor
77 W. Washington, Chicago
RE: Grassroots Petition Drive for Nov. 6 Binding Referendum to Term Limit Chicago’s Mayor Passes Halfway Mark in Signatures
Mighty Volunteer Effort Needed to Meet 100,000 Signature Goal by August 6 Filing Deadline for the November 6 Election
Of the 10 largest cities in the United States, only Chicago does not have a term limit on its mayor.
Mayoral term limits are the best way to achieve true campaign finance reform and open up City Hall for more democracy.
The term limit referendum will spark a citywide debate on the structure and fairness of politics and government in Chicago.
The November 6 voter referendum to impose term limits on the mayor would be the first initiative and binding referendum in Chicago’s 181-year history.
If mayoral term limits are approved by the voters on November 6, the incumbent mayor would be ineligible to run in the February 26, 2019 mayoral election.
The Take Charge Chicago referendum on mayoral term limits reads as follows: “Shall Chicago adopt the following term limit for the office of Mayor effective for the mayoral election in 2019 and thereafter: No person may hold the office of Mayor for more than two consecutive elected 4-year terms (with all prior consecutive terms of the current officeholder counted in determining the term limit for that officeholder)?”
Voters in 21 Illinois communities have used binding referendums to impose term limits on their mayors, including Springfield, Naperville, Oak Lawn, Des Plaines, and Lombard.
* Today is the first Metropolitan Water Reclamation District board meeting since former Rep. Ken Dunkin was appointed by Gov. Bruce Rauner. Rauner called on Dunkin to resign yesterday after Tim Mapes whistleblower Sherri Garrett said Dunkin told her and another woman “I want to take both of you home and see which one will be the naughtiest.” Dunkin had quite the reputation in the House, and not exactly a pristine one, either. From yesterday…
Actually, I think your question is more important now.
FYI Ken Dunkin just walked into the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District board meeting. Gov. Rauner on Wednesday asked him to resign from board. Hearing he’s fighting it.
Word is that he’s throwing a party for himself after the meeting.
*** UPDATE *** Dunkin talked to reporters today and called Sherri Garrett’s allegations “100 percent baseless.” He said he had talked to Gov. Rauner and that Rauner had asked him to resign, but said “I’m not resigning”…
Ken Dunkin says he talked to Rauner and the governor asked him to resign. He repeatedly called Sherri Garrett's accusations "baseless." pic.twitter.com/FqTfvOgPpV
…Adding… Statement from Dr. Shundar Lin, at-large candidate for MWRD…
Mr. Dunkin’s refusal to resign in the face of these grave accusations is an insult to his accusers, taxpayers, and those he claims to represent. It is troubling Mr. Dunkin was even considered for this position. No matter the position, board or elected office, we should aspire to the highest standards and that is what I will bring as a member of the MWRD.
While both Lang and Mapes’ resignation shows Madigan is taking swift action in response to the claims, some still questioned the tactic. State Rep. Kelly Cassidy, D-Chicago, who criticized Madigan’s response to harassment allegations in February and last month detailed allegations of retaliation from Mapes and a key Democratic Madigan ally, said the response is nothing new.
“This is the lather, rinse, repeat that I talked about in February. We now need the real change that follows,” Cassidy said. “We need to see what leadership looks like. When he keeps saying he’s committed to make change and bringing an end to this culture, it goes beyond firing people. Because we’ve seen this before and here we are again.”
Cassidy said Madigan’s response of forcing people out is “the same play.”
“I think in each case he hopes it goes away,” Cassidy said. “It’s not that simple.”
Within hours, Madigan asked for Mapes’ resignation. Here’s part of a statement Madigan released:
“I intend to appoint an individual with extensive experience conducting investigations to review all operations of the House of Representatives, including but not limited to the Clerk’s Office where Ms. Garrett works.”
Notice anything? “I intend to appoint …”
Madigan continues to press his thumb into the process of investigating complaints of harassment in his own operation. It’s a pattern of control we and others repeatedly have called out. This situation requires an outside investigation. Outside. Madigan can’t be appointing, permitting or supervising. When will the speaker get it?
[ON SCREEN: LOWEST CREDIT RATING]
Anchor 6: The lowest credit rating of any state in American history
Bruce Rauner: “I am not in charge, I’m trying to get to be in charge ”
Anchor 7: Governor Bruce Rauner has been named the worst governor in America
…Adding… Rauner campaign…
Governor Rauner worked with the General Assembly to achieve a bipartisan budget compromise that funds critical priorities like education and reconstruction of the Quincy Veterans Home, working to get things done for the state of Illinois while Pritzker has been following Madigan’s lead, standing for higher taxes and more corruption at all costs.
…Adding… A response to the response…
FIXED Response: @BruceRauner was sidelined by the General Assembly to achieve a compromise to help fund priorities he decimated, like fatal mismanagement in Quincy. Bruce "I'm not in charge" Rauner is desperately attacking since he has no accomplishments to run on. #ilgov#twillhttps://t.co/rqyWnPQgYG
How much longer can Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan survive?
After months of slowly building charges involving sexual harassment and his organization’s alleged failure to deal with it, the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back may have arrived today in the form of charges from one Madigan staffer aimed at the speaker’s top aide and longtime confidant, chief of staff Tim Mapes.
How many more times can Madigan say he knew nothing about an incident, or pattern of incidents, in his political or government organizations and not be held accountable?
“I think he’s more vulnerable than he’s ever been before. The #MeToo movement has brought down many more powerful men than him,” said ABC7 Political Analyst Laura Washington.
Democratic House Speaker Michael Madigan has got trouble.
Lordy, does he have trouble.
Not so much that he’ll break a sweat in public.
But Madigan will at least purse his lips, because he just lost his second right-hand man within a week to another in a series of sexual-harassment allegations that continues to dog his political organization in Chicago and the speaker’s office in Springfield.
So far, none of his members are calling for his head and neither are his major funders. They’re the ones with the real power to decide. Until that happens, I don’t think he’s going anywhere.
* The significance of Tim Mapes’ ouster as Speaker Madigan’s chief of staff cannot be easily overstated. He dominated just about every aspect of Statehouse life. A few telling tidbits from today’s coverage. Tribune…
One longtime political operative recalled Wednesday that Mapes had a sign on the wall of his statehouse office referencing a line from the “Wizard of Oz”: “Nobody gets in to see the wizard. Not nobody, not no how.”
The diminutive Mapes played an outsized role in controlling the flow of legislation on the House floor as he stood at the side of Madigan and top Democratic leaders when they presided over the ornate chamber from the speaker’s podium. Mapes accumulated power over the years as other key Madigan confidantes left state government and lawmakers and staff privately grumbled of Mapes’ condescending and abrasive style.
State Rep. Litesa Wallace, D-Rockford, tweeted out a simple “Noted,” in response to Mapes’ resignation.
Lawmakers said that was Mapes standard reply to hundreds of emails he received. Wallace — who penned an op-ed in November describing a culture of sexual harassment towards women in government — said “there was nothing comical about that” tweet.
“That was me noting the resignation,” Wallace said, adding she wasn’t surprised to hear of the resignation.
People would write a ten-page analysis that they’d labored on for days and he’d reply “Noted.” It was, to many, a passive aggressive trait.
Timothy Mapes, Madigan’s chief of staff since 1992, has been a state employee for 40 years and until his firing was paid at a rate of $17,332 per month, state records show. That equates to an annual salary of nearly $208,000.
Mapes is 63. Because of his age, long tenure in state government, and his high rate of pay, he qualifies for a state pension exceeding $125,000 annually based on calculations by WBEZ.
Today, the Rauner campaign is launching a new paid digital ad as part of a series shining light on the corrupt relationship between disgraced ex-Governor Rod Blagojevich and JB Pritzker.
This ad includes audio from FBI wiretaps of Pritzker and Blagojevich discussing who would be the “least offensive” African-American to fill Barack Obama’s Senate seat.
