Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: Goring oxen
Posted in:
* The plot thickens…
The real estate manager who helped Rahm Emanuel buy his North Side home testified in a residency hearing today that Emanuel’s renters wanted $100,000 to end their lease early when he returned to Chicago this fall to run for mayor. […]
Levy said he passed the $100,000 figure to Emanuel, who called it “ridiculous.” The counter offer was $5,000 a month for every month early the Halpins left, Levy said. The lease is set to expire in mid-2011.
* And could this $100K gambit by the Halpins been part of the challenge to Emanuel’s candidacy? Maybe…
A lawyer for Halpin called him, [realtor Paul Levy] said, and told him he was concerned that another lawyer Halpin was talking to, Burt Odelson, was speaking to the press about the situation in possible breach of the confidentiality agreement that is a rider on the Halpins’ lease.
Odelson went on to be the lawyer for the lead objectors to Emanuel’s candidacy.
Hmm. Curiouser and curiouser.
* Hearing officer Joe Morris is expected to decide today whether to call Rahm Emanuel’s wife, Amy Rule, to the stand. So far, Emanuel’s lawyers have been able to keep her out of it. But after yesterday’s weirdness, Morris may have no choice…
Rahm Emanuel’s tenant, Lori Halpin, testified Wednesday that contrary to Emanuel’s testimony, she has never seen any of the 100 boxes of personal items he says he left in the basement.
Halpin said she has not found any hidden room where such boxes might be stored. There is a piece of plywood behind some shelves against an outside wall that would lead to an area under a porch. But she would not think people would store valuables there, she said. […]
As part of his argument that he is eligible to run for mayor, Emanuel testified Tuesday that he kept 100 boxes of valuable and sentimental personal items – his wife’s wedding dress, a jacket owned by his grandfather – in the Ravenswood home he rented out to the Halpins a year and a half ago.
But…
A friend of Chicago mayoral hopeful Rahm Emanuel’s wife testified Wednesday that she helped pack away their family heirlooms and other mementos for storage before Emanuel moved to Washington to become President Obama’s chief of staff.
Mee Kim-Chavez spoke at a Chicago Board of Election Commissioners hearing on residency challenges to Emanuel’s bid for the city’s top job. She said she helped Emanuel’s wife, Amy Rule, store 20 to 30 boxes in a crawl space under a home addition they’d built.
“She was going to come back,” Kim-Chavez said of the possessions. “There was no need for her to take them with her to D.C.”
On Tuesday, Rahm Emanuel testified that he didn’t know whether his wife checked the box for a “permanent” address change on the US Postal Service’s form to forward their mail to DC. That could also be a reason for her testimony.
If Morris decides not to call Ms. Rule, then he could wrap everything up today.
* Meanwhile, some of the objectors who got all goofy on Tuesday and didn’t seem to understand how to ask a question and that the questions they asked needed to be pertinent to a residency case complained to Morris yesterday about their treatment in the media…
The proceedings sometimes became chaotic as objectors shouted in protest and held Emanuel’s vehicle sticker up to overhead lights to try to see if it was real.
Some of those citizens pointed out Wednesday they did ask some proper questions, complaining to Morris that the news media portrayed them as a ragtag group of conspiracy theorists and “rejects from ‘The Price is Right.’”
Objector Georzetta “Queen Sister” Deloney challenged the media to stop making fun of her behind her back, saying that from there, “you’re in a real good position to kiss my butt.”
Quite a large number of Tuesday’s objectors appeared to have far higher self-esteem than self-awareness. It was positively painful, which may have been the object of the whole charade. It’s not the media they should be upset with, it’s the people who may have put them up to this scam in the apparent hope that their antics could ruffle Emanuel’s feathers.
They failed miserably. And it could’ve even backfired today…
Burt Odelson, the lead attorney in the case against Emanuel, appeared to be losing his patience with some of the non-attorney activists who have piggy-backed onto his case. Odelson complains that some of the out-of-left-field questions some of them ask cloud the central legal question of the case.
As one challenger, Dr. Lora Chamberlain, asked Levy whether the disputed “storage area” in the house’ basement where the Emanuels say their valuables are stored is heated, Odelson told her that was a “great” question.
“Really?” she asked.
“Yeah, for the other side,” he said.
Heh.
*** UPDATE 1 *** AP…
Rahm Emanuel’s wife won’t be subpoenaed to testify as the hearing over residency challenges to his mayoral bid grinds on.
Some of the objectors to Emanuel’s Feb. 22 mayoral bid withdrew their requests to subpoena Amy Rule.
A Chicago Board of Election Commissioners hearing officer also denied a request for a subpoena from another objector who didn’t give a good reason why Rule should be called to testify.
No surprise about the objector’s nonsensical reasoning. Sheesh.
*** UPDATE 2 *** As if there was ever any doubt…
The mayoral-race mystery of where candidate Rahm Emanuel stored boxes of personal items has been solved.
Attorneys for Emanuel visited the house he owns in Ravenswood at 1:30 p.m. Thursday, located the much-discussed “crawl space,” looked inside and found the valuable items Emanuel had maintained he had stored there. They have argued the fact they left the items there while Emanuel went to Washington D.C. to work as President Obama’s chief of staff shows he always planned to return to Chicago — and therefore should be eligible to run for mayor.
Attorney Dana S. Douglas brought photos of the boxes — which include his wife’s wedding dress and other sentimental items — to Emanuel’s ongoing residency hearing just 80 minutes after taking the pictures Wednesday, and he passed copies of the photos around to all the objectors claiming Emanuel is not a bona fide resident of Chicago.
But, of course, one of the objectors refused to be convinced…
“I believe that these photographs are phony and faked. Those could have been taken in my house,” said objector Zakiyyah Muhammad.
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 12:44 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: Goring oxen
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Uncle….UNCLE!!!
Comment by Cincinnatus Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 12:53 pm
“far higher self-esteem than self-awareness”
You should make a macro for that beautiful phrase, Rich. I’m pretty sure you will have plenty of occasions to use it.
– MrJM
Comment by MrJM Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 1:17 pm
Cincy,
What does the Mega-File contain about you that you’re crying “Uncle…UNCLE!!!”? (/snark)
Comment by Northsider Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 1:23 pm
Poor Odelson. Here he is Fighting-the-Power and performing this magnificent public service for The People and he’s worried that he’s getting thrown in with the loonies.
When you work for The Ringmaster at the circus, you’re going to have to deal with the clowns.
Are the Halpins holding out for a different dollar figure now? Is that why they’re putting themselves out there?
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 1:23 pm
Maybe I don’t understand the issue or statute. I don’t understand why Rahm is even trying to defend his intention to move back to Chicago, the main issue as I see it is that he was in service to the United States. I believe serving as chief of staff to the Commander in Chief of the United States Military is undoubtedly service to the US.
Comment by Charlie Wilson Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 1:26 pm
What happened to the English recording group that released “Our House” in the Eighties? There may be a few bucks to be made issuing a Chicago specific parody…
Comment by Honest Abe Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 1:26 pm
I don’t think Mr. Odelson will be too upset…he will be laughing all the way to the bank I think…Someone is paying his hourly fee and the more “loonies” that bog down the proceedings means more hours Mr. Odelson can bill.
Comment by Reality Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 1:26 pm
“Rahm Emanuel’s tenant, Lori Halpin, testified Wednesday that contrary to Emanuel’s testimony, she has never seen any of the 100 boxes of personal items he says he left in the basement.”
“Are the Halpins holding out for a different dollar figure now? Is that why they’re putting themselves out there?”
Sounds like they are already holding out for $1,000 per box.
Comment by 32nd Ward Roscoe Village Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 1:27 pm
I’d love to see Halpin (and possibly Odelson) get in trouble for breach of the confidentiality provision in his agreement with Rahm. But that’s not a suit Rahm can easily bring. Darn.
Comment by ChicagoR Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 1:29 pm
Maybe both Laurie Halpin and Mee Kim-Chavez were telling the truth.
Who is to say that Kim-Chavez did not help pack up boxes of belongings that were moved afterwards?
Is this why Emanuel’s team has been so opposed to having Amy Rule return to Chicago to testify? As for Emanuel’s “small children” needing their mommy, one of the tots is about seventeen years of age.
This case is getting curiouser and curiouser.
Comment by Honest Abe Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 1:31 pm
Charlie, I know. It has been that way, ever since I can remember.
Comment by PPHS Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 1:37 pm
Some people in DC might argue that what that what Rahm did for the administration was hardly “service”.
Comment by Bill Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 1:40 pm
Northsider,
I wish I had thought to stand outside the hearing room with a concession stand of these:
http://zapatopi.net/afdb/
The CBoE made a huge error combining all complaints into one hearing. What could have been a rational (and brief) discussion of the law which obviously needs some sort of revision, turned instead into a fiasco.
Typical.
Comment by Cincinnatus Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 1:51 pm
Cincy @ 1:51,
Great idea! Something tells me there’s still plenty of time for you make a nice holiday bonus…
Comment by Northsider Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 1:54 pm
=serving as chief of staff to the Commander in Chief of the United States Military is undoubtedly service to the US.=
A lot of people see this as pertaining to service in the US Military. Many of the people who are doing, or have done, military service find it very objectionable that Rahm is comparing their service to his.
Sitting in a fox hole in Afghanistan, standing a watch in Korea of Kosovo or any other of the thousands of hard duty our service people endure is not to be compared with making big bucks in a D.C. office.
Comment by Bongo Furry Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 1:59 pm
The implications of the legal interpretation of “residence” or “residing” could have far-reaching effects on much more than who gets to be crowned the mayor of Chicago.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 2:02 pm
“What happened to the English recording group that released “Our House” in the Eighties? There may be a few bucks to be made issuing a Chicago specific parody…”
They are still around, doing quite well in the UK, and are appropriately named “Madness.”
Comment by Ron Burgundy Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 2:10 pm
You have to admit, Rahm’s attorney - Mike Kasper - is doing a great job widdling away the issues to focus on what was his client’s intent to reside in Chicago. This hearing could have gone in lots of crazy directions. At the end of the day, looks like Rahm will win.
Comment by Northside Blogger Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 2:14 pm
I know, I know, I have too much time on my hands.
Rounding off the numbers, Emanuel figured to make about $60,000.00 in gross rental income from the Halpins for the second year of the lease. His offer to buy out the lease was about $5,000.00 per month, so that comes to about a total of $50,000.00. According Emanuel’s witness, Levey, the tenants asked for $100,000.00 to move immediately and Rahm played tough and said “No.”
At the end of the day, was it all worth it? Emanuel has to be the thriftiest multimillionaire in Chicago. First, he rents his house to strangers to make a few bucks rather than paying for a security company to guard the place during his absence and then he refuses to pay a premium price to have tenants move on a minute’s notice with nine or ten months left on the lease thereby jeopardizing his mayoral candidacy in the process.
After this matter is litigated and appealed, what do you think his total legal expenses are going to amount too? Pennywise and pound foolish. I wish that Emanuel was that frugal when he was appropriating tax dollars in Washington as an elected official. I imagine that he has spent close to $100,000.00 already.
@Chicago R: If the Halpins were possibly subject to an administrative subpoena, I really doubt that they breached any confidentiality agreement with Emanuel. Once this matter ended up before the election board that agreement was probably rendered moot.
Comment by Honest Abe Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 2:15 pm
===Maybe I don’t understand the issue or statute.===
There are two issues at play in this: whether Rahm is a qualified voter, and whether he resided in Chicago for one year prior to the election. To be a candidate for mayor, both standards must be met.
The qualified voter statute explicity states that service to the United States is not a factor in residency, that the person in service is still a resident for voting purposes.
It’s the second standard that is problematic for Rahm. It is this additional threshold Rahm must meet to be a candidate for office (as opposed to simply voting in an election).
Residency is a legal term, but on the face of it, Rahm would seem to not meet this standard since he was working and living in Washington until October of this year. That is why his case is about intention, and although we can agree he intended to return to Chicago, the Board has to make that determination. There are dozens of cases where the Board has taken a literal interpretation of ballot-access laws and they’ve kicked off candidates for minor technicalities. Rahm is asking them to look at intent rather than the actual, literal reading of the statute. It’s not a slam dunk for him. Odelson has the better case.
Regardless of Morris’s decision, I think this will go next to the courts, and ultimately to the state supreme court. Neither side seems prepared to give up without going all the way. Is it possible the courts could find the residency issue either unconstitutional or subject to broader interpretation? Sure. But it’s also just as likely that they rule based on the literal intrepretation of the law, and Rahm won’t qualify.
Again, most of the case law is on Odelson’s side. Rahm would need the court to ignore all of the other cases where candidates were removed from the ballot on technicalities in order to prevail.
Personally, I think the residency requirement, in this case, is ridiculous. But it’s the law. And until the courts rule, the law is working against Rahm.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 2:22 pm
Nothsider,
;-{)> I’m running to Costco to stock up on heavy duty Reynolds Wrap. Slightly more expensive, but much more durable and I can charge a premium.
Bongo,
This case is not about Rahm’s service. Nobody questions he was working for POTUS and that it is service to the government. The issue revolves around whether Rahm took actions (filed tax forms incorrectly, executed contracts, car registrations, whatever) that forfeited residency, actions which he only corrected when he chose to run for mayor. I for one would not equate a cushy office job to the sacrifice of a warrior, but that really doesn’t matter here.
Anonymous @2:02 pm,
Yup. The statute needs a tweak and that is being lost as a result of the kooks allowed into hearing during the serious consideration of Odelson’s challenge.
Comment by Cincinnatus Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 2:22 pm
==A lot of people see this as pertaining to service in the US Military.==
And a lot don’t.
Comment by Bigtwich Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 2:23 pm
===After this matter is litigated and appealed, what do you think his total legal expenses are going to amount too? ===
But that’s campaign cash. You make an excellent point, though. In essence, he’s a cheapskate. lol
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 2:23 pm
So I guess “to make me feel like a big man” isn’t a good reason.
– MrJM
Comment by MrJM Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 2:24 pm
===The statute needs a tweak===
It needs more than that. What we need is a comprehensive review and rewrite.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 2:28 pm
Although I may not be the biggest Rahm fan, this circus seems ridiculous and intended to unnecessarily embarrass he and his family.
I’m not sure how Emanuel celebrates the holiday season but if it were me, it would be by making a list and checking it twice.
Comment by Phineas J. Whoopee Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 2:32 pm
Honest Abe,
I agree that now, at the time of the election board hearing, the confidentiality provision is moot. But the Trib reference above seems to pertain to a point long ago, before Odelson was representing the objector and before any objection was even filed. So at that time and based on the article, a confidentiality provision could quite well have been applicable, and Halpin could have breached it by talking to Odelson. Or if Odelson was talking to Halpin as his attorney (it isn’t clear from the reference whether Odelson was acting as Halpin’s attorney or not), Odelson could have been the one who broke the confidentiality. As I said above, I’d love to see what happened all come out, but Rahm’s never going to sue on that provision.
Comment by ChicagoR Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 2:34 pm
===seems to pertain to a point long ago, before Odelson was representing the objector===
That’s not clear.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 2:43 pm
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 2:28 pm:
===The statute needs a tweak===
It needs more than that. What we need is a comprehensive review and rewrite.
Philosophically speaking, couldn’t the statute just be eliminated? It seems to me “carpetbagging” might be more appropriately a campaign issue (c.f. Alan Keyes, not that carpetbagging was needed in that case) instead of a legal one.
Comment by Cincinnatus Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 2:45 pm
Rich: I agree that the article doesn’t have all the facts. But it does say that “Odelson went on to be the lawyer for the lead objectors to Emanuel’s candidacy.” If that is true, it had to be before he was representing the objector, no?
Comment by ChicagoR Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 2:46 pm
Rahm is laughing all the way to the mayor’s office.
Comment by just sayin' Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 2:49 pm
ChicagoR, officially, perhaps.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 2:56 pm
Honest Abe: “Our House” wasn’t released in the eighties nor was it performed by an english *group.* written by graham nash, an englishman, it was recorded by crosby, stills, nash & young on “deja vu” (crosby & stills being americans, young a canadian).
i always thought nash’s song “chicago” was more appropriate, but, then, i’m a floridian…
Comment by bored now Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 3:32 pm
Bored, I’m with you, the CSN Our House is the better song. However, i believe Madness recorded the Our House song that Abe referred to. Different songs, same title.
But more to the point, either song is ripe for parody in this soap opera between the Emanuels and the Halpins, Chicago’s own Hatfield and McCoys.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 3:37 pm
With respect to Rahm, his house, and the Halpins, a famous quote from CASABLANCA comes to mind (and may be deep in Rahm’s head about now): “Of all the gin joints in the world why did you have to walk into mine?”
Comment by Responsa Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 3:38 pm
What a cautionary tale. Careful who you rent to.
The Emanuels left their house — and a grand piano, mind you — in the care of the Balloon Boy parents.
Anything to get on TV. The Era of Famous for Being Famous.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 3:44 pm
Honest Abe, here’s the real question: who is paying Odelson, and how much is he being paid?
Comment by lakeview Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 3:47 pm
Many a city employee has been fired for keeping a rental apt. in Chicago staying a few nights a week there but actually “residing” with his family in the suburbs. Courts have ruled that your residence is where you “sleep”. It doesn’t matter where you vote, what the address is on your drivers license, or if your intent is on moving back some day. It is where you reside. Rahm lived in DC not Chicago. There are a lot of stupid laws on the books. That doesn’t mean the public can ignore them at will. He should be kicked off. What Kasper is doing is asking for special treatment because Rahm is Rahm and has already been annointed mayor by the press.
Somewhere along in the process some judge will do the right thing and kick Rahm off the ballot.
Comment by Bill Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 3:49 pm
Bill, two different laws, two different definitions.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 4:05 pm
–Many a city employee has been fired for keeping a rental apt. in Chicago staying a few nights a week there but actually “residing” with his family in the suburbs–
Bill, is that true? That’s a real question, not snark.
I knew coppers back in the day who shared an apartment in the city for the mailing address, while living in the suburbs. Tom Lyons, of course, “lived” above his ward office while keeping a “summer home” in Wilmette.
But are there, today, actually bed-checkers going about? If so, what prompts the action? How the heck can you prove anything without outrageous invasions of privacy?
Residency rules for employment are ludicrous. They were established to keep workers under the thumb of machine bosses or to keep neighborhoods from going “the wrong way.”
Almost 2011, folks. After all this nonsense, time to move on.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 4:14 pm
47th Ward: thanks for the clarification! i had no idea there was another song by the same name.
Bill: no one lives in d.c. that’s the whole reason why the capitol city is not a state…
Comment by bored now Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 4:21 pm
I’ve only been keeping a cursory eye on this messy hearing. What has come out of the absentee ballot issue? If I recall correctly , he was temporarily taken off voting rolls, or suspended, or something other than completely “purged.” then reinstated when he requested an absentee ballot. What paperwork was he required to fill out to get “reinstated” and what procedure was used to get him a ballot in this situation?
The circus sure has detracted from some of what should be the main issues in this case.
Comment by Louis G. Atsaves Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 4:22 pm
“Attorney Dana S. Douglas brought photos of the boxes — which include his wife’s wedding dress and other sentimental items — to Emanuel’s ongoing residency hearing just 80 minutes after taking the pictures Wednesday, and he passed copies”
Dana Douglas will be happy to know that the Sun-Times thinks she’s a he.
Comment by ChicagoR Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 4:22 pm
===What paperwork was he required to fill out to get “reinstated” and what procedure was used to get him a ballot in this situation?===
He was automatically reinstated the first time when he voted absentee. The second time when he changed his address and voted early in October.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 4:26 pm
But where are the long-form photographs of the Emanuels’ storage boxes?
Obviously his wife’s wedding dress and the other sentimental items must actually be stored in a crawl space somewhere in Kenya!
Obviously!
– MrJM
Comment by MrJM Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 4:30 pm
MrJM, for the win!
Comment by lakeview Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 4:34 pm
Word,
Yeah, its true. It happens a lot lately. The IG’s office actually follow employees around and take photos of the guy getting out of his car and entering his home in the burbs. They show up at his city address, look in the closets, check the date on his milk bottle,etc. and the poor slob usually gets fired.
I know its a different law but still.
Comment by Bill Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 4:42 pm
–They show up at his city address, look in the closets, check the date on his milk bottle,etc. and the poor slob usually gets fired.–
Seriously, dude? How do they gain entrance to the residence? Wbat provokes the investigations to begin with?
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 4:52 pm
Wordslinger,
You are quite correct that many residency cases are directed against public employees (except those fortunate souls who had public jobs, but the courts “grandfathered” them in), but there have been cases directed towards politicians. Your memory is good as to the late Thomas Lyons. He was challenged as to his residency in Chicago where he was a ward committeeman. He argued that his one bedroom apartment in the 45th ward was his legal residence and he described his property in Glencoe as a summer home. Ditto for longtime Chicago City Clerk John Marcin who preferred to spend his time closer to the Wisconsin border. Marcin never gave up his Chicago home, however.
Unlike public employees (police, fire fighters, teachers, etc.), politicians find it much easier to maintain a “legal residence” for political purposes even if they spend 99% of there time living someplace else. They purchase a small condo, rent an apartment or own two or more homes.
I cannot count the number of retired Federal legislators who never returned to Illinois once their careers in Washington ended.
It is not that complicated for a politician to comply with the residency laws. You spend some money and keep your voter’s registration, driver’s license, vehicle registration and other permits current.
Emanuel looks foolish because he could not keep his ducks in a row like the other politicians. The incumbent mayor, Richard M. Daley, according to some, spends more days in Michigan than he does in Chicago, but he has always kept a home here.
Michael Kasper is a talented lawyer, but if he does not win this case it will not be his fault. It will be that of his client.
Comment by Honest Abe Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 4:56 pm
The Halpin “$100k lease buyout/settlement” angle seems to be a non-issue. From a legal perspective, who cares what happened or was discussed after Daley decided not to run for another term? Even if Emmanuel had paid $100k and Halpin moved out the residency challenges would still have been filed.
Query to the election lawyers: Presuming Morris rules in Emmanuel’s favor what is the next step for the objectors? An appeal to the Circuit Court? Does the Circuit Court Judge look at the case under a de novo review standard? Is the same circus repeated before the circuit court judge or does she rule based a review of the record made before Morris? Inquiring minds want to know!
Comment by The Ghost of Shadrack Bond Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 4:59 pm
==Somewhere along in the process some judge will do the right thing and kick Rahm off the ballot.==
I’ll bet you good money that this does not happen. That you would be so naive, Bill, really surprises me as I thought you were suberbly in tune with politics. There is not one person who will kick Rahm off of the ballot for going to Washington, D.C., to serve the President of the United States. Whether I like him or not, Rahm maintained “residency” in the sense that he was going to return when his service was complete. That’s pretty much all there is to the argument. In the specific case of determining residency for something like this, anyone judging is going to construe “resident” as broadly as possible.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 5:01 pm
The city has PIs on retainer and the cops have their own public integrity unit. If a cop doesn’t let the investigators in he goes right on suspension and heads for a dismissal hearing. Same with firemen. It is a little harder for teachers but they still get a few every year.
Whatever board they work for hears the “evidence” and boom, they’re gone. Usually they get investigated if some boss or even a co-worker doesn’t like them and turns them in.
Comment by Bill Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 5:01 pm
I guess that “suburbly” error must have been a Freudian slip . . .
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 5:04 pm
==he was going to return when his service was complete.==
Objection…irrelevant.
Comment by Bill Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 5:05 pm
Ummm . . . that’s pretty much the only relevant issue here.
Your objection is overruled.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 5:07 pm
If Emanuel prevails in the courts, the decision will have to set a brand new legal precedent that expands the definition of residency. If the courts follow the older case decisions, Rahm may be toast. This is Illinois. Anything can happen.
If the case is taken up on judicial review, there will be arguments and briefs, but no further testimony. The procedure is somewhat like administrative review, but not in all respects.
Comment by Honest Abe Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 5:17 pm
I agree w/ the Reader. Southsiders don’t want a northsider running for mayor. Paul Green/WGN pointed out the irony of having a homeless man collecting signatures to oust Rahm Emanuel on a residency issue. Rahm Emanuel was my Congressman and I don’t doubt he is a Chicagoan. This is Chicago politics. Look at how the power mongers behaved in previous elections when Daley and Washington died in office and when Washington ran against Epton. It’s democracy but democracy doesn’t necessarily bring out the best in people.
Comment by Emily Booth Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 5:19 pm
Honest Abe, Emanuel’s oldest turned 13 this year. There are two younger kids. I don’t think his wife should have leave them to be subjected to abuse from the crazies in that audience to answer one or two questions that her husband could not answer, and that aren’t that important to the case. Whatever box she checked on the postal form was to ensure their mail was being forwarded from Chicago for as long as they were in D.C.
And I wouldn’t pay the Halpins $100,000 to move strictly on principal.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 5:24 pm
Call me crazy, but I’m more concerned by the precedent set if they rule against him. It will mean folks who answer the call to serve will be forced to give up their residency unless they can afford to keep their Chicago home empty.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 5:31 pm
If Emanuel or anyone else was elected Mayor of Chicago and moved to the ‘burbs afterwards, they would be investigated like anyone else. The residency law for city workers is stupid, but at least they don’t require you to live in the city the year before you apply for a job.
Comment by SR Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 5:37 pm
The potential for family members having to endure abuse and criticism from crazies is not going to decrease if Rahm Emanuel becomes mayor. Politicians have to sacrifice their privacy and that of their families. That is one of the unfortunate trade-offs that comes with the territory.
The continued absence of Emanuel’s family from Chicago seems a trifle peculiar. Even Michael Sneed commented that it looked odd that Rahm Emanuel did not spend Thanksgiving with his spouse and children. He traveled to see his brother in Hollywood over this holiday.
Almost every school in the country will close its doors for the holidays within the next few days, but where does Emanuel intend to house his family after the school term ends? In the Milwaukee Avenue apartment? Are the wife and children waiting to see if Emanuel is elected in 2011 before they move back? Or are they waiting for the Halpins to move out next summer?
These are all personal family decisions to be sure, but having an intact family at the same address helps immensely in a residency case.
Comment by Honest Abe Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 5:37 pm
Honest one, I read Sneed and she said no such thing. The brothers and their families spend the holidays together, and it was Ari’s turn to host, according to M. Sneed.
It’s not like they don’t have friends and family they can stay with in Chicago. They usually go on vacation for Christmas break. Last year was India, the year before that was Africa. Yeah, I read too much Sneed.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 5:53 pm
Of course it’s not, but they shouldn’t have to go out of their way to subject themselves to abuse when it’s not really necessary to the case. Intent is relatively easy to prove. He doesn’t have to put his wife on the stand or interrupt his kids school year to do it.
The case is most likely going to come down to whether a judge qualifies his service to the President as business of the United States.
Comment by SR Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 6:04 pm
Take a moment to consider the fact that the major issue in the Chicago mayoral race this week has been the implications of whether or not Rahm Emanuel left boxes in the crawlspace of his house when he moved to DC.
In a city that has problems from revenue streams, to unemployment, to schools, to street violence, to transit, to corruption, we’re left wondering where Amy Rule’s wedding dress has been since June 2009. I’m as amused and entertained by political theater as the next guy but this is nuts. These residency issues are important, but people are dying because of Chicago’s problems.
Comment by LakeviewJ Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 6:11 pm
Rahm’s house in the middle of our street
Rahm’s house was his castle and his keep
Rahm’s house is where the Halpins vote and sleep
Rahm’s house available for sale or lease
Rahm’s house in the middle of our street
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 7:12 pm
=Almost 2011, folks. After all this nonsense, time to move on.=
word’s absolutely right, but we probably see this from different perspectives–and I’ll admit mine has absolutely nothing to do with law, or the way it’s interpreted…or even abused sometimes. It’s entirely “naive”.
I’d like to *imagine* that the spirit behind requiring those who serve to live in their neighborhoods was to keep them close to their community so that they could serve them better because they understand their community–and are known within their community–as an integral part of it. Think of the Irish cop long ago walking his beat.
Home is where the heart is, and IMHO that’s why our State and our Country are in the shape that they’re in. It’s mostly all “politics” now. No heart.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 9:01 pm
That dribble was obviously from me. Lost my handle again.
Comment by The REAL Anonymous fka Anonymous Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 9:03 pm
And here’s an example of what I mean: the wedding dress. Real or staged?
Comment by The REAL Anonymous fka Anonymous Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 9:06 pm
And I’ll just add one more silly thought–from a woman’s perspective. Your wedding dress–even from a marriage that failed–is often perceived as part of your family history. You don’t leave your family history with strangers. It’s yours to protect.
I’m not saying that that’s the case here, but the wedding dress makes for good drAma, so I’m biting because I’m in the mood.
Comment by The REAL Anonymous fka Anonymous Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 9:13 pm
This sucks.
Rahm sucks because he doesn’t qualify as a Chicago resident. Everyone else sucks because they are forced to play games to demonstrate that Rahm sucks.
Please, out of a city the size of Chicago, there is no one else to be Mayor?
Rahm is nothing special. Stop pretending he is.
Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 9:21 pm
Awwwwwwwwwwwww, V-Man! You’re back! *tears of joy rolling down my cheeks!!!!!!*
Welcome back, V-Man.
Comment by The REAL Anonymous fka Anonymous Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 9:24 pm
OK. Now I’ll read what you wrote. (lol)
Comment by The REAL Anonymous fka Anonymous Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 9:25 pm
You know, Rich, as I Republican I must say that I do enjoy this “hippie commune” you’ve created here for all of us. Thank you for opening the door for us to come in.
Happy holidays, everyone!
Comment by The REAL Anonymous fka Anonymous Thursday, Dec 16, 10 @ 9:55 pm