Kadner: Do mayors have a conflict if elected to Legislature?

• Reprints

Steven Landek

Updated: March 1, 2012 8:23AM

Steven Landek is the mayor of Bridgeview. He is also a state senator up for re-election this year.

A political opponent in that Senate race, Raul Montes Jr., wants Landek removed from the ballot, claiming that the two offices are incompatible. He contends that there’s a conflict of interest and a conflict of public duties.

Illinois law on this subject is convoluted and contradictory.

Court rulings state that incompatibility of public office arises when the law “specifically prohibits the occupants of either one of the offices in question from holding the other and also where the duties of either office are such that the holder of the office cannot in every instance fully, faithfully discharge all the duties of the other office.”

The Illinois Constitution forbids public officials or employees of government agencies from being paid as a public official or employee while in attendance as a legislator. Judges and associate judges cannot serve as officers of state or local governments.

There have been several court rulings that broaden the prohibitions on holding two public offices at the same time.

One ruling stated that county board members cannot also be township assessors because the assessors are often subordinate to the county board, which sets their budgets.

In other court cases, judges have ruled that village trustees cannot serve as park district commissioners, library board trustees or school board members at the same time.

And the courts have ruled it doesn’t matter if these officials abstain from voting on issues that would create a conflict because they could persuade their fellow members to support a measure even if they didn’t vote on it themselves.

There are also several Illinois attorney general opinions over the years that cover conflicts of interest by public officials. One of them was written in 1969 by William J. Scott.

Scott was asked by House Speaker Ralph T. Smith whether there was a conflict of interest “for a state legislator to be a mayor of a city, and conversely, is a mayor of a city a qualified candidate for membership in the General Assembly.”

Scott quoted a court case known as “People v. Capuzi” and concluded that there was “no incompatibility between the office of state legislator and mayor of a city and therefore, a mayor of a city is a qualified candidate for membership in the General Assembly.”

Since that time, several mayors have served in the Legislature, including Tinley Park’s Ed Zabrocki.

“That was 1995 (when he served), and things have changed a lot since than,” Zabrocki said. “The thing most people don’t understand is that you spend a lot of time not only in Springfield during the legislative session but attending committee meetings in Chicago and Springfield. There are a lot of demands on your time.

“But the real difference now is the financial condition of the state, which is very grave, and some really difficult and important decisions have to be made. I don’t see how someone now could be mayor and a state legislator and do justice to both jobs.”

What confuses me, as a layman, is how judges, attorneys general and the Legislature could determine that a mayor would have no conflict of interest.

The Legislature creates laws that have a direct impact on local governments. It passes bills that eventually fund, or result in the withholding of funds, for public improvements and other projects.

One of the key issues last year was whether the state should withhold tax money it shares with municipalities so it could fill holes in the state budget.

On the other hand, mayors can bring an expertise to state government that other lawmakers might not have.

“When I was in Springfield, many times I would be asked what impact a law might have on municipalities because the other legislators really had no clue how a law might impact local governments,” Zabrocki said.

Many legislators are involved in businesses that can either be harmed, or helped, by laws that come before the Legislature.

Not only are they allowed to hold public office, but often they appeal for voter support by claiming, “I’m a businessman and know how government should run.”

Are people better off represented by a businessman who stands to benefit financially from a new law or by a mayor who understands the impact of laws on the citizens who live in his town?

Mayors, businessmen and lawyers have all served in Springfield for decades.

To see how Illinois is measurably better for that today, you would need a nuclear microscope.