33-Petition Exhibits v04

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY
COUNTY DEPARTMENT, COUNTY DIVISION ELECTIONS

TIM MEEGAN,
)
)
) Court No.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Petitioner,
v.
CITY OF CHICAGO BOARD OF ELECTION
COMMISSIONERS as the election authority
and the canvass authority for the Chicago
Municipal Election held on February 24, 2015,
LANGDON D. NEAL, Commissioner,
MARISEL A. HERNADEZ, Commissioner,
RICHARD A. COWEN, Commissioner, and
DEBORAH L. MELL, Candidate,
ANNISA WANAT, Candidate,
Respondents.
VERIFIED ELECTION CONTEST PETITION

NOW COMES the Petitioner, TIM MEEGAN, individually and by his attorneys, Richard
K. Means and Andrew Finko P.C., and hereby files his verified election contest petition pursuant
to 65 ILCS 20/21-27 and Article 23 of the Illinois Election Code, contesting the results of the
election for the office of Alderman for the 33rd Ward of the City of Chicago that was voted upon
at the Chicago Municipal General Election held on February 24, 2015, as follows.
Preface
1.
This election contest is filed prior to the time that the Respondent, Board of
Election Commissioners, is scheduled to proclaim the results of the election for Alderman for the
33rd Ward of the City of Chicago, based upon information available as of the date of filing, and
without the benefit of a discovery recount which, under the Illinois Election Code, can not even
be requested until after the proclamation. Indeed, some late arriving absentee ballots and
qualified provisional ballots have not yet been counted as of the last statutory day for the filing
of this action. Necessarily, in the situation presented herein, where 65 ILCS 20/21-27 requires an
election contest petition be filed within five days of the Election Day, the parties must plead
more generally subject to later amendment after the proclamation, further discovery or a recount.
See, Evans v. Preckwinkle, 259 Ill.App.3d 187, 636 N.E.2d 730 (1st Dist. 1994), and ONeal v.
Shaw, 248 Ill.App.3d 632, 618 N.E.2d 780 (1st Dist. 1993).
Parties & Background
2.
Petitioner, TIM MEEGAN (Meegan), is a duly qualified elector in the 33rd Ward
of the City of Chicago, and a candidate for election to the office of Alderman for the 33rd Ward in
the City of Chicago, with his name printed upon the ballot for said office and voted upon in the
33rd Ward Chicago Municipal General Election held on February 24, 2015.
3.
Respondent, City of Chicago Board of Election Commissioners (Board), is the
election authority which conducted the Chicago Municipal General Election held on February
24, 2015, and sits as the canvassing board that will perform the official count of the ballots and
render a final proclamation of results of the election for the office of Alderman for the 33rd Ward
of the City of Chicago, Illinois. In addition, Respondent, Board, is named in its capacity as the
election authority that will conduct all supplemental or runoff elections in the City of Chicago on
April 7, 2015, and for purposes of subjecting the Board to orders of this Court.
4.
Respondents, Langdon Neal, Marisel A. Hernandez and Richard Cowen, are each
Commissioners and members of the Board, and are named in their official capacities as
Commissioners of the Board.
5.
Respondents, Deborah L. Mell (Mell) and Annisa Wanat (Wanat), were
candidates competing for election to the office of Alderman for the 33rd Ward in the City of
Chicago, and their names were printed upon the ballot for said office and voted upon in the 33rd
Ward Chicago Municipal General Election held on February 24, 2015.
6.
Initially, on Election Day, February 24, 2015, the Board posted at its website
2
unofficial results that stated that Meegan garnered 2,739 votes, or 34.54% of the total votes cast
in the 33rd Ward Aldermanic election, that Mell garnered 3,932 votes, or 49.59% of the total
votes cast in the 33rd Ward Aldermanic election, and that Wanat garnered 1,258 votes, or 15.87%
of the total votes cast in the 33rd Ward Aldermanic election, such that a supplemental or runoff
election would occur between Meegan and Mell. Copy of the February 24, 2015 unofficial
election results (by precinct) for the office of Alderman in the 33rd Ward of the City of Chicago
are attached and incorporated herein as Exhibit A.
7.
As of March 1, 2015, the Board posted at its website unofficial revised results that
stated that Meegan garnered 2,754 votes, or 34.13% of the total votes cast in the 33rd Ward
Aldermanic election, that Mell garnered 4,037 votes, or 50.03% of the total votes cast in the 33rd
Ward Aldermanic election, and that Wanat garnered 1,278 votes, or 15.84% of the total votes cast
in the 33rd Ward Aldermanic election, such that a supplemental or runoff election would not
occur in the 33rd Ward. Copy of the March 1, 2015 unofficial election results (by precinct) for the
office of Alderman in the 33rd Ward of the City of Chicago are attached and incorporated herein
as Exhibit B.
8.
The Board's unofficial revised results posted on or about March 1, 2015, report
Respondent, Mell, purportedly at two votes above 50% of all votes cast (or 4,035 votes) in the
33rd Ward election held on February 24, 2015.
9.
The Board continues counting additional ballots, and will issue a final
proclamation of results fourteen days after the February 24, 2015 Election, on March 12, 2015.
ALLEGATIONS OF ERRORS
10.
Petitioner, Meegan, voted in the election of the Alderman for the 33rd Ward and his
campaign had volunteers observing Election Day procedures at precincts throughout the 33rd
Ward. As set forth more fully and specifically below, in good faith and based upon reasonable
3
inquiry which continues, Meegan alleges that, and believes that, mistakes and fraud have been
committed in the casting and counting of ballots for the office of Alderman for the 33rd Ward in
the City of Chicago at the election on February 24, 2015.
11.
When the results of the full count and other discovery become available, further
information will come to the attention of the Petitioner, Meegan, that there were mistakes, errors
or fraud in the counting of the ballots for the subject election, and/or fraud committed regarding
the election, such that the count of votes must be revised in the favor of the Petitioner, Meegan.
12.
As set forth more fully and specifically below, the Respondent Board's count of
the election totals for the election of Alderman for the 33rd Ward for the City of Chicago was
performed in derogation of the Board's statutory duties in that its determination and anticipated
proclamation of results embody results in which numerous invalid ballots were wrongly counted,
numerous valid ballots were wrongly not counted, numerous duly qualified voters of the 33rd
Ward in the City of Chicago were wrongly denied their right to vote in the election, and
numerous persons who were (on the Election Day) not duly qualified voters of the 33rd Ward in
the City of Chicago but were wrongly permitted to vote in the election, and overshadowed
throughout the ward by pervasive electioneering from one candidate, Respondent, Mell. Based
on the facts alleged herein developed through Petitioners investigation, and as will be more fully
developed and pled, the true, correct and lawful count of the votes which were properly cast, and
which should have been properly cast, in the 33rd Ward in the City of Chicago should show a
result different from that reported by the Judges of Election and thus far unofficially announced
by the Board; and should show that Mell Was Not elected as Alderman for the 33rd Ward of the
City of Chicago by in excess of 50% of all votes cast in the February 24, 2015 Chicago
Municipal General Election and that a supplemental or runoff election is required on April 7,
2015 to determine the true, correct and lawful successful candidate.
4
Proportional Reduction
13.
All allegations of street address below refer to street addresses within the
corporate limits of the City of Chicago unless otherwise noted.

14.
Meegan requests that, except as otherwise specified, any such votes found invalid
by virtue of this petition be remedied by proportional reduction or (as the case may be) addition.
The effect of the proportional reductions and other changes in votes necessitated by the
allegations in this petition is that Meegan's vote total should be increased, and Mell's should be
decreased, as required by the methodology of proportional reduction and addition.
15.
Voters Living Outside the 33rd Ward. Numerous voters have moved their legal
residence to outside the 33rd Ward, or never lived within the 33rd Ward, but voted in the subject
election by virtue of an application for ballot which bore an address in the 33rd Ward. Further, on
information and belief, these persons cast a vote in the race for the office of Alderman for the
33rd Ward of the City of Chicago. In each case, this Court should declare the vote invalid as
violative of 10 ILCS 5/5-2 and other applicable law.
16.
Voters Voting From Addresses Which Are Commercial Establishments
And/Or Do Not Contain Residential Living Units. Numerous voters were registered at
addresses within the 33rd Ward of the City of Chicago but these addresses were not their true
residence addresses, the purported residence address being a commercial establishment and/or
not containing residential living units thereon. Further, on information and belief, these persons
cast a vote in the race for the office of Alderman for the 33rd Ward of the City of Chicago. In each
case, this Court should declare the vote invalid as violative of 10 ILCS 5/3-2 and 5-2, and other
applicable provisions.
17.
Voters Voting from a Different Address in the 33rd Ward of the City of
Chicago. Numerous voters have voted in the election by virtue of an application for ballot
5
which bore a particular address in the 33rd Ward of the City of Chicago in Cook County.
However, these voters actually resided at a different address in the 33rd Ward of the City of
Chicago in Cook County. Further, on information and belief, these persons cast a vote in the race
for the office of Alderman for the 33rd Ward of the City of Chicago. In each case, this Court
should declare the vote invalid as violative of 10 ILCS 5/5-2 and other applicable law.
18.
Voters Not Registered to Vote. Numerous voters were illegally permitted to vote
from the addresses in the precincts stated, notwithstanding their not being registered to vote at
any address in the 33rd Ward of the City of Chicago. Further, on information and belief, these
persons cast a vote in the race for the office of Alderman for the 33rd Ward of the City of
Chicago. In each case, this Court should declare the vote invalid as violative of 10 ILCS 5/5-2,
17-9, and other applicable law.
19.
Voters Who Voted From An Address At Which They Were Not Registered.
Numerous voters were registered at addresses within the 33rd Ward of the City of Chicago but
voted from a different address in 33rd Ward of the City of Chicago, the voting address being one
from which they were not registered. Further, on information and belief, these persons cast a vote
in the race for the office of Alderman for the 33rd Ward of the City of Chicago. In each case, this
Court should declare the vote invalid as violative of 10 ILCS 5/5-2 and other applicable law.
20.
Absentee Voters Whose Applications Were Not Certified. Numerous voters
voted by absentee ballot, and their absentee ballot applications were not duly certified.
Nonetheless, the voters were illegally permitted to cast a ballot as an absent voter. Further, on
violative of 10 ILCS 5/19-3 and other applicable law. In the case in which absentee ballot are so
numerous in the particular precinct that the ballot relating to such voter can not, with certainty,
6
be separated from other absentee ballots, proportionate reduction should be applied. However, to
the extent that ballots from voters with this deficiency can, with certainty, be separated and
identified, the specific ballot should be invalidated and the party herein benefiting from such
ballot should have his or her total for the precinct reduced by a whole vote.
21.
Absentee Voters Whose Applications Were Falsely Certified. Numerous voters
voted by absentee ballot, and their absentee ballot applications were falsely certified, and not
true. Nonetheless, such voters were illegally permitted to cast a ballot as an absent voter. Further,
on information and belief, these persons cast a vote in the race for the office of Alderman for the
violative of 10 ILCS 5/19-3 and other applicable law. In the case in which absentee ballot are so
22.
Absentee Ballot Carrier Envelope Missing. Numerous voters voted by absentee
ballot but apparently did not execute the affidavit on the envelope in which the absentee ballot
was mailed. Further, on information and belief, these persons cast a vote in the race for the office
of Alderman for the 33rd Ward of the City of Chicago. In each case, this Court should declare the
vote invalid as violative of 10 ILCS 5/19-5 and other applicable law. In the case in which
absentee ballots are so numerous in the particular precinct that the ballot relating to such voter
can not, with certainty, be separated from other absentee ballots, proportionate reduction should
be applied. However, to the extent that ballots from voters with this deficiency can, with
certainty, be separated and identified, the specific ballot should be invalidated and the party
7
herein benefiting from such ballot should have her total for the precinct reduced by a whole vote.
23.
Signature on Application for Absent Voters Ballot Different from Signature
on Absentee Ballot Envelope. Numerous voters purportedly voted by absentee ballot, but the
signature on the application for absentee ballot, on information and belief, was executed by a
different person than the person who executed the affidavit on the absentee ballot carrier
envelope. Further, on information and belief, these persons cast a vote in the race for the office of
Alderman for the 33rd Ward of the City of Chicago. In each case, this Court should declare the
vote invalid as violative of 10 ILCS 5/19-3, 19-5, and other applicable law. In the case in which
herein benefiting from such ballot should have her total for the precinct reduced by a whole vote.
24.
Absentee Voters Who Failed To Sign The Absentee Ballot Envelope.
Numerous voters purportedly voted by absentee ballot, but they did not sign the affidavit on the
absentee ballot mailing envelope. Further, on information and belief, these persons cast a vote in
the race for the office of Alderman for the 33rd Ward of the City of Chicago. In each case, this
Court should declare the vote invalid as violative of 10 ILCS 5/19-3, 19-5, and other applicable
law. In the case in which absentee ballots are so numerous in the particular precinct that the
ballot relating to such voter can not, with certainty, be separated from other absentee ballots,
proportionate reduction should be applied. However, to the extent that ballots from voters with
this deficiency can, with certainty, be separated and identified, the specific ballot should be
invalidated and the party herein benefiting from such ballot should have his or her total for the
precinct reduced by a whole vote.
8
25.
Absentee Voters Who Failed To Certify Their Address On the Absentee Ballot
Envelope. Numerous voters purportedly voted by absentee ballot, but they failed to indicate their
residence/registration address on the affidavit on the absentee ballot carrier envelope. Further, on
violative of 10 ILCS 5/19-3, 19-5, and other applicable law. In the case in which absentee ballots
are so numerous in the particular precinct that the ballot relating to such voter can not, with
certainty, be separated from other absentee ballots, proportionate reduction should be applied.
However, to the extent that ballots from voters with this deficiency can, with certainty, be
separated and identified, the specific ballot should be invalidated and the party herein benefiting
from such ballot should have his or her total for the precinct reduced by a whole vote.
26.
Absentee Ballots Not Properly Delivered. Numerous voters voted by absentee
ballot, but, by mistake and/or fraud, their absentee ballots were not properly delivered to the
Chicago Board of Election Commissioners, thus invalidating the ballots. Further, on information
and belief, these persons cast a vote in the race for the office of Alderman for the 33rd Ward of the
City of Chicago. In each case, this Court should declare the vote invalid as violative of 10 ILCS
5/19-6, 19-8, and other applicable law. In the case in which absentee ballots are so numerous in
the particular precinct that the ballot relating to such voter can not, with certainty, be separated
from other absentee ballots, proportionate reduction should be applied. However, to the extent
that ballots from voters with this deficiency can, with certainty, be separated and identified, the
specific ballot should be invalidated and the party herein benefiting from such ballot should have
his or her total for the precinct reduced by a whole vote.
27.
Voters Who Voted In A Precinct In Which They were Not Registered.
Numerous voters were registered to vote from a particular address and precinct, but actually
9
voted at another precinct in which they neither resided nor were registered. Further, on
28.
No Application for Absentee Ballot. Numerous voters voted by absentee ballot
but apparently did not submit a signed application to entitle them to receive that ballot. Further,
29.
No Record of Voter Voting Absentee. Numerous voters purportedly voted by
absentee ballot, but the records of the Respondent Chicago Board of Election Commissioners do
not show that the absentee ballot was processed by that office. Further, on information and belief,
these persons cast a vote in the race for the office of Alderman for the 33rd Ward of the City of
19-5, and other applicable law. In the case in which absentee ballots are so numerous in the
particular precinct that the ballot relating to such voter can not, with certainty, be separated from
other absentee ballots, proportionate reduction should be applied. However, to the extent that
ballots from voters with this deficiency can, with certainty, be separated and identified, the
10

30.
Voter Failed to Sign Application for Absent Voters Ballot. Numerous voters
purportedly voted by absentee ballot, but they failed to sign the application for absentee ballot.
Further, on information and belief, these persons cast a vote in the race for the office of
herein benefiting from such ballot should have his or her total for the precinct reduced by a
whole vote.
31.
Legal Voters Denied The Right To Vote. Numerous registered and qualified
voters in the 33rd Ward of the City of Chicago were illegally denied their right and opportunity to
vote by mistake or fraud, including but not limited to errors in Board documents, late opening,
equipment failure, locked doors, election judge errors, et al. Further, on information and belief,
these persons would have cast a vote in the race for the office of Alderman for the 33rd Ward of
the City of Chicago. In each case, this Court should proportionately add such votes.
32.
Voters Improperly Permitted to Vote. Numerous registered and qualified voters
in the 33rd Ward of the City of Chicago were illegally permitted to vote in the precinct polling
place on Election Day even though such voters' names appeared on listings as having been issued
a grace period, absentee, or early ballot, without submitting their absentee ballots for
cancellation, or otherwise complying with 10 ILCS 5/17-9 and other provisions of the Election
Code in this regard. In the case in which these ballots are so numerous in the particular precinct
11
that the ballot relating to such voter can not, with certainty, be separated from other ballots,
33.
Improper Handling, Altering and/or Removal of Ballots from Precincts.
Ballots and electronic vote counting devices were improperly handled, altered and/or removed
by persons in precinct locations who were not duly credentialed and authorized to so handle,
alter or remove ballots and electronic vote counting devices, and, for example, at least three
ballots that were cast by voters and/or at least one electronic vote counting device, were illegally
and improperly removed from precinct locations without being counted in the Board's vote
totals. Such actions of unauthorized persons so tainted the counting of the votes in numerous
precincts, as to render all such results in the precinct unreliable and subject to full review by the
Court, and the party herein benefiting from such actions should have her total for the precinct
reduced by a whole vote for each such tampered ballot.
Allegations Requiring Modification of Whole Votes
34.
Applications For Ballots Which Do Not Bear Initials Of Any Election Judge.
Numerous votes were cast which should not have been counted since the application for ballot
did not bear on its face the initials of an election judge. Further, on information and belief,
ballots were issued for such applications and votes were cast in the race for the office of
particular ballot invalid as lacking the requisite integrity and assurances that applications for
ballots were issued in accordance with the Election Code and the Board's required procedures as
documented in the Board's 2015 Judge of Election / Polling Place Administrator Handbook.
12
35.
Ballots Which Do Not Bear Initials Of Any Election Judge. Numerous votes
were cast which should not have been counted since the ballot did not bear on its face the initials
of an election judge. Further, on information and belief, such votes were cast in the race for the
office of Alderman for the 33rd Ward of the City of Chicago. In each case, this Court should
declare the particular ballot invalid as violative of 10 ILCS 5/17-9 and 10 ILCS 5/17-11, and the
Board's required procedures as documented in the Board's 2015 Judge of Election / Polling
Place Administrator Handbook.
36.
Absentee Voters Whose Applications Were Not Certified. Numerous voters
voted by absentee ballot, and their absentee ballot applications were not duly certified.
Nonetheless, the voters were illegally permitted to cast a ballot as an absent voter. Further, on
violative of 10 ILCS 5/19-3 and other applicable law. In the case in which absentee ballots are so
37.
Absentee Voters Whose Applications Were Falsely Certified. Numerous voters
voted by absentee ballot, and their absentee ballot applications were falsely certified, and not
true. Nonetheless, such voters were illegally permitted to cast a ballot as an absent voter. Further,
violative of 10 ILCS 5/19-3 and other applicable law. In the case in which absentee ballots are so
13
38.
Absentee Ballot Carrier Envelope Missing. Numerous voters voted by absentee
ballot but apparently did not execute the affidavit on the envelope in which the absentee ballot
was mailed. Further, on information and belief, these persons cast a vote in the race for the office
of Alderman for the 33rd Ward of the City of Chicago. In each case, this Court should declare the
vote invalid as violative of 10 ILCS 5/19-5 and other applicable law. In the case in which
whole vote.
39.
Signature on Application for Absent Voters Ballot Different from Signature
on Absentee Ballot Envelope. Numerous voters purportedly voted by absentee ballot, but the
signature on the application for absentee ballot, but, on information and belief, the application
was executed by a different person than the person who executed the affidavit on the absentee
ballot carrier envelope. Further, on information and belief, these persons cast a vote in the race
for the office of Alderman for the 33rd Ward of the City of Chicago. In each case, this Court
should declare the vote invalid as violative of 10 ILCS 5/19-3, 19-5, and other applicable law. In
the case in which absentee ballots are so numerous in the particular precinct that the ballot
14
relating to such voter can not, with certainty, be separated from other absentee ballots,
40.
Absentee Voters Who Failed To Sign The Absentee Ballot Envelope.
Numerous voters purportedly voted by absentee ballot, but they did not sign the affidavit on the
absentee ballot mailing envelope. Further, on information and belief, these persons cast a vote in
the race for the office of Alderman for the 33rd Ward of the City of Chicago. In each case, this
Court should declare the vote invalid as violative of 10 ILCS 5/19-3, 19-5, and other applicable
law. In the case in which absentee ballots are so numerous in the particular precinct that the
ballot relating to such voter can not, with certainty, be separated from other absentee ballots,
41.
Absentee Voters Who Failed To Certify Their Address On the Absentee Ballot
Envelope. Numerous voters purportedly voted by absentee ballot, but they failed to indicate their
residence/registration address on the affidavit on the absentee ballot carrier envelope. Further, on
15
42.
Absentee Ballots Not Properly Delivered. Numerous voters voted by absentee
ballot, but, by mistake and/or fraud, their absentee ballots were not properly delivered to the
Chicago Board of Election Commissioners, thus invalidating the ballots. Further, on information
and belief, these persons cast a vote in the race for the office of Alderman for the 33rd Ward of the
City of Chicago. In each case, this Court should declare the vote invalid as violative of 10 ILCS
5/19-6, 19-8, and other applicable law. In the case in which absentee ballots are so numerous in
the particular precinct that the ballot relating to such voter can not, with certainty, be separated
from other absentee ballots, proportionate reduction should be applied. However, to the extent
that ballots from voters with this deficiency can, with certainty, be separated and identified, the
43.
Voters Who Voted In A Precinct In Which They were Not Registered.
Numerous voters were registered to vote from a particular address and precinct, but actually
voted at another precinct in which they neither resided nor were registered. Further, on
44.
No Application for Absentee Ballot. Numerous voters voted by absentee ballot
but apparently did not submit a signed application to entitle them to receive that ballot. Further,
16
45.
No Record of Voter Voting Absentee. Numerous voters purportedly voted by
absentee ballot, but the records of the Respondent Chicago Board of Election Commissioners do
not show that the absentee ballot was processed by that office. Further, on information and belief,
these persons cast a vote in the race for the office of Alderman for the 33rd Ward of the City of
19-5, and other applicable law. In the case in which absentee ballots are so numerous in the
particular precinct that the ballot relating to such voter can not, with certainty, be separated from
other absentee ballots, proportionate reduction should be applied. However, to the extent that
ballots from voters with this deficiency can, with certainty, be separated and identified, the
46.
Voter Failed to Sign Application for Absent Voters Ballot. Numerous voters
purportedly voted by absentee ballot, but they failed to sign the application for absentee ballot.
Further, on information and belief, these persons cast a vote in the race for the office of
17
whole vote.
47.
Election Judges Issued Ballots Without Comparing Signatures on Ballot
Application. Numerous voters were issued ballots and allowed to cast ballots, but were not the
named duly registered voters, because such signatures were not genuine and proper signatures of
the respective voters, including but not limited to all voters casting ballots from 6:00 am until
after 2:30 pm, when an Attorney General inspector confirmed that none of the voters who cast
ballots in Ward 33, Precinct 26 had signatures in the voter registration database being used to
compare signatures upon ballot applications, and no such signatures should be counted as valid
for Ward 33, Precinct 26, and all other similar Precincts in which signatures were not validated as
being genuine.
48.
Election Judge Improperly Influenced At Least Three Ballots Cast By
Visually Impaired and/or Disabled Voters. On at least three occasions, in at least Ward 33,
Precinct 17 (Brisku Bistro 4100 N. Kedzie Ave.) visually impaired voters were improperly
influenced in casting their ballots with only one election judge present in the voting booth,
including but not limited to election judge Luis Cortez, a supporter of Respondent, Mell, who
was the lone election judge that went into the polling booth with at least three voters to cast their
ballots. The ballots cast by such improperly influenced voters were improperly manipulated to
favor Respondent Mell, were the choices of the misbehaving public officials, and not of the
voters, and therefore the appropriate legal remedy is to deduct whole votes from the intended
beneficiary of the misbehavior, Respondent Mell. In the alternative, such votes were
impermissibly tainted and should be subject to proportionate reduction.
18
49.
Election Judge Improperly Exerted Influence As Spanish Translator. On at
least three occasions, in at least Ward 33, Precinct 17, three voters were improperly influenced
when election judges designated as Spanish language translators, including but not limited to
election judge Luis Cortez, improperly told voters using the Spanish language to vote for
Respondent, Mell. In addition, election judge Luis Cortez improperly permitted a poll watcher
for Respondent, Mell, to serve as a Spanish language translator in the role of election judge,
translating for voters casting ballots while in the election booth. During such time Respondent,
Mell's poll watcher was functioning as a Spanish language translator on Election Day, election
judge Luis Cortez then undertook the role of a poll watcher and checker acting on behalf of
Respondent, Mell, marking off voters on Respondent, Mell's voter check list in that same polling
location. The ballots cast by such improperly influenced voters were improperly manipulated to
favor Respondent Mell, were the choices of the misbehaving public officials, and not of the
voters, and therefore the appropriate legal remedy is to deduct whole votes from the intended
beneficiary of the misbehavior, Respondent Mell. In the alternative, such votes were
impermissibly tainted and should be subject to proportionate reduction.
50.
Ballots Mistakenly Not Counted. Numerous voters voted on ballots which,
through mistake, error or fraud were not counted by the judges of election. Further, on
33rd Ward of the City of Chicago. In each case, this Court should, to the extent that ballots with
this deficiency can, with certainty, be separated and identified, validate such ballots and the party
herein benefiting from such ballot should have his or her total for the precinct increased by each
corresponding whole vote. Specifically, but not limited to:
a) Provisional ballots were improperly issued by election judges to persons who were
registered in a different precinct of Ward 33, and voters were erroneously issued a
provisional ballot instead of being directed to travel to their correct precinct by an election
19
official and/or were by mistake, error or fraud deposited in the ballot box counting device
for the wrong precinct and therefore were not counted, and the Board should be estopped
from striking (or not counting votes) provisional ballots that were cast in reliance upon the
statements of election officials and/or election judges;
b) Votes on touchscreen machines assigned to a different precinct which may have been
located in the same room for which a ballot authorization card was properly issued and the
votes cast by registered and qualified voters which were therefore not counted by mistake,
error or fraud because they were cast on a touchscreen device for a different precinct;
c) Ballots which were properly issued and cast by registered and qualified voters which were
by mistake, error or fraud deposited in the spoiled ballot envelope and not deposited in the
ballot box counting device, and therefore were not counted;
d) Ballots which were properly issued and cast by registered and qualified voters which were
by mistake, error or fraud wrongly determined to have identifying (or distinguishing)
marks and therefore were not counted;
e) Ballots which were properly issued and cast by registered and qualified voters which were
by mistake, error or fraud determined not to clearly display the intent of the voter, but were,
in fact, clearly intended to vote for Petitioner Meegan, but were not counted;
f) Ballots which were properly issued and cast by registered and qualified voters which were
by mistake or error of a counting device not counted, including but not limited to
calibration errors on touch screen voting machines, wherein a vote cast for Petitioner
Meegan was erroneously counted as a vote for Respondent, Mell, and was not counted for
Petitioner, Meegan.
51.
Ballots Mistakenly, Erroneously or Fraudulently Counted. Numerous voters
cast ballots which, through mistake, error or fraud were counted by the judges of election, but
which were issued and cast contrary to the provisions of the Election Code. These persons cast a
vote for the office of Alderman for the 33rd Ward of the City of Chicago. In each case, this Court
should, to the extent that ballots with this deficiency can, with certainty, be separated and
identified, validate such ballots and the party herein benefiting from such ballot should have his
or her total for the precinct decreased by each corresponding whole vote. Specifically, but not
limited to:
a) Ballots cast in the 33rd Ward, 2nd Precinct were initially reported on February 24, 2015 by
the election judges' printout at this precinct as being 247 ballots being cast containing 233
votes cast (100 votes for Meegan, 89 for Mell, 44 for Wanat, 1 write-in, and 13 under
20
votes); however, as of March 1, 2015, the Board has reported unofficial results showing
323 votes cast in the 33rd Ward, 2nd Precinct, with an uncorroborated 62 vote increase for
Mell;
b) On information and belief, the ballots cast in the 33rd Ward, 10th Precinct were prepared and
completed by Respondent, Mell's supporters, and were not genuine ballots cast by the
voters in the precinct, because the ballots were completed by staff at St. Paul's Nursing
Home, without proper authorization to do so, and do not represent the will of the voters,
and were not properly completed in accordance with the Election Code, particularly for
example, when a person signed with an X or other mark which did not match the
signature from the voter's voter registration card;
c) Judges at the 33rd Ward, 10th Precinct, filled out ballots for voters, individually, and without
a second judge to assist voters, and at least one judge was particularly recalcitrant, and
repeatedly filled out ballots for residents of St. Paul's Nursing Home, even after being told
he should have a second judge with him when assisting, and even when resident repeatedly
denied requesting a ballot and/or stated that they did not want to vote at all, or did not want
to vote for candidates in the 33rd Ward;
d) Ballots cast in the 33rd Ward, 7th Precinct (Ambassador Nursing & Rehabilitation Center,
4900 N. Bernard) were inconsistently and erroneously reported, without corroboration or
explanation, such that at the end of day on February 24, 2015, 34 ballots were returned,
while the Board's unofficial results on March 1, 2015 reports 43 returned absentee ballots
out of a total of 56, and at least one ballot was returned on February 25, 2015, while all
others were returned with a date of February 24, 2015.
52.
Voters Were Impermissibly and Pervasively Electioneered at the Polling Places
By the Mell Campaign. Numerous voters were impermissibly electioneered to vote for
Respondent Mell at numerous polling places. Further, on information and belief, these persons
cast a vote in the race for Alderman for the 33rd Ward of the City of Chicago. Because the
electioneering was specifically for Respondent, Mell's, benefit, and no other candidate, the
appropriate legal remedy is to deduct whole votes from the intended beneficiary of the
misbehavior, Respondent Mell. In the alternative, such votes were impermissibly tainted and
should be subject to proportionate reduction. Specifically, but not limited to:
a) Numerous voters were impermissibly electioneered to vote for Respondent Mell at the
polling places, by the distribution and placement of palm cards in the voting booths,
electioneering and promoting voters to cast ballots in favor of Respondent, Mell;
b) Numerous voters were impermissibly electioneered to vote for Respondent Mell at the
21
polling place by the placement of palm cards advocating votes for Mell in the protective
envelopes in which the ballots were enclosed upon issuance;
c) Numerous voters were impermissibly electioneered to vote for Respondent Mell at the
polling place, for example, in the 33rd Ward, in the following Precincts: 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 10, 19,
20, and others, by walking and talking with voters within the 100 foot protective line
specifically in promotion of Candidate, Mell, and/or standing at or near the inner door to
the polling location, all the while, urging voters to support and vote for Mell;
d) Numerous voters were impermissibly electioneered to vote for Respondent Mell at the
polling place, for example, in the 33rd Ward, 9th Precinct, by the placement of campaign
signs urging a vote for Mell and the distribution of campaign literature urging a vote for
Mell from within the 100 foot protective line to the door of the polling place;
e) Numerous voters were impermissibly electioneered to vote for Respondent Mell at the
polling place, for example, in the Ward 33, Precincts 12, 26, 28, by poll watchers,
Respondent candidate Mell, herself, Respondent Mell's father, Richard Mell,
Commissioner Deborah Shore, and others, many of whom entered polling locations without
presenting credentials and/or exceeded the number of poll watchers permitted in a precinct,
and acted improperly and urged voters to support and vote for Respondent Mell inside of
the polling place;
f) Respondent Mell, used at least one polling location, Ward 33, Precincts 19 and 5 (two
precincts at Ceviche Restaurant, 2544 W. Diversey), as a staging area for Respondent
Mell's, campaign operation, including storage of campaign yard signs in plain view inside
the polling place room, within ten feet of the entrance to the room, exposing all voters in
those two precincts to impermissible electioneering in the polling place in violation of the
Election Code.
53.
Improper Handling, Altering, Abandonment and/or Removal of Ballots from
Precincts. Ballots and electronic vote counting devices were improperly handled, altered,
abandoned and/or removed by persons in precinct locations who were not duly credentialed and
authorized to so handle, alter or remove ballots and electronic vote counting devices, and, for
example, at least three ballots that were cast by voters were removed from ballot boxes, at least
one electronic vote counting device (memory card) was not counted in the Board's vote totals,
and election materials in at least one precinct were abandoned by election judges and not
delivered to the receiving station (Ward 33/Precinct 28). Such unauthorized access to ballots by
persons without authority to do so, tainted and altered the total number of votes that were
22
reported by the Board, and therefore the appropriate legal remedy is to deduct whole votes from
the intended beneficiary of the misbehavior, Respondent Mell. In the alternative, such votes were
impermissibly tainted and should be subject to proportionate correction.
54.
Election Judges Allowed Unauthorized Access to and Removal of Ballots.
Election judges at the polling location in Ward 33, Precinct 17 broke down equipment after the
polls closed without following protocol in the Board's 2015 Judge of Election / Polling Place
Administrator Handbook, and before tabulating the votes, and left paper ballots unlocked,
unsealed and accessible to two of Respondent Mell's poll watchers, who handled and looked at
paper ballots, and at least three ballots were then missing from the unattended, unlocked and
unsealed box of ballots, and these ballots were not counted in the Board's totals.
55.
Equipment Errors, or Failures. Equipment at numerous locations used for
purposes of voting and tabulating votes was defective, erroneous and/or not properly working for
periods of time on February 24, 2015, including but not limited to failing to get a zero reading
before commencing voting, calibration errors on touch screen voting, failing to count all votes
cast, failing to have equipment delivered at polling locations, failure to secure and lock ballot
boxes, ballot scanners not working, electronic poll book errors (Ward 33/Precinct 26 had no
voter signatures found in electronic poll book as of 2:30 pm), no working touch screen machines
(Ward 33/Precinct 28), and other equipment failures, which caused polling locations to either not
open on time, to be closed during Election Day, and/or otherwise prevented voters from casting
their votes and having their votes counted by the Board.
56.
Polling Places Not Staffed by Duly Qualified Judges. Numerous polling
locations, including but not limited to Ward 33, Precincts 2, 3, 4, 5, 17, 18, 26, and many other
polling locations in the 33rd Ward were not staffed by duly qualified elections judges, who had
read and become familiar with the Board's 2015 Judge of Election / Polling Place Administrator
23
Handbook, causing polling locations to either not open on time, to be closed during Election
Day, and/or otherwise preventing voters from casting their votes and having their votes counted
by the Board.
57.
Polling Place Relocated and/or Closed Without Adequate Notice to Voters.
Polling location for Ward 33, Precinct 21was moved to Bateman School, after being at an
different location for many years, without adequately and appropriately notifying all voters of the
changed location, which was also a smaller space without sufficient privacy for voting, causing
numerous voters to walk away without voting, due to lack of assistance from the Board.
Similarly, the front doors to the polling location for Ward 33, Precinct 4 (Linne School), were
locked by the Principal from Linne School, and at least 10 voters were prevented from gaining
access to the polling location, and left without being able to cast their ballots.
58.
Election Judges Who Were Not Properly Trained Erred In Consolidating
And Reporting Ballots That Were Cast. Numerous election judges in precincts throughout
Ward 33 deviated from the Election Code and the Board's required procedures as documented in
the Board's 2015 Judge of Election / Polling Place Administrator Handbook, and erroneously
and inconsistently reported the total ballots cast in various precincts, failed to consolidate votes,
and/or failed to print paper printouts of consolidated results from numerous precincts, raising
many questions regarding the credibility and reliability of the election results in the 33rd Ward,
and requiring a recount of all ballots cast on Election Day, as follows:
Precinct
in Ward 33
Total Ballots Cast on

Election Day as
reported by Election
Judges on Form 80
Consolidated Ballots
Cast on Election Day
from Voting Card
Activator
224
224
252
247
247 (only one printed) Yes; 5 ballots
248
Not Consolidated
Not Printed
24

Election Day as
reported on paper
printout
Discrepancy between
# ballots counted by
election judges and #
ballots reported to
Board
Possible
Precinct
in Ward 33

Election Day as
reported by Election
Judges on Form 80
Consolidated Ballots
Cast on Election Day
from Voting Card
Activator

Election Day as
reported on paper
printout
Discrepancy between
# ballots counted by
election judges and #
ballots reported to
Board
242
242
180
178
200
199
MISSING
Not Consolidated
Not Printed
Possible
277
Not Consolidated
Not Printed
Possible
232
10
227
237
237
Yes; 10 ballots
11
234
230
230
Yes; 4 ballots
12
224
225
Not Printed
Yes; 1 ballot
13
231
230
230
Yes; 1 ballot
14
98
Not Printed
Yes; 98 ballots
15
285
285
Not Printed
Possible
16
334
17
281
Not Consolidated
18
253
251
19
0 (179 on wrong line) 188
20
249
21
224
22
271
23
220
24
318
319 (not consolidated) Not Printed
25
234
234
26
160
160 (not consolidated) Not Printed
Possible
27
178
178
Possible
28
182
182
Yes; 2 ballots
269
Possible
251
Yes; 2 ballots
Not Printed
Yes; 9 ballots
269
Yes; 2 ballots
Yes; 1 ballot
234
Not Printed
Prayer For Relief

WHEREFORE, Petitioner, Tim Meegan, respectfully requests entry of an order as
follows:
(a)
entering an expedited schedule for discovery and an evidentiary hearing in this
matter, prior to April 7, 2015;
25
(b)
directing a full and complete recount of all ballots cast in the 33rd Ward, to
determine the validity of the City of Chicago Board of Election Commissioners counting of
ballots and proclamation, such recount to include, but not be limited to, an examination of the
relevant electronic poll books (and corresponding electronic data and logs), voting devices, paper
ballots, voters applications for ballots, precinct binder cards (and their computerized equivalent),
affidavits, and all other materials from said ward;
(c)
changing and correcting the results of the election as required by the allegations
and proofs of this petition; and

(d)
granting such other and further relief in favor of Petitioner, as may be just and
proper.
Respectfully submitted:
TIM MEEGAN
By:
__________________________________
One of his attorneys
Richard K. Means
806 Fair Oaks Avenue
Oak Park, Illinois 60302
Telephone: 708-386-1122
Facsimile: 708-383-2987
Cellular: 312-391-8808
Email: Rmeans@RichardMeans.com
Cook County Attorney Number 27351
Andrew Finko P.C.
79 W. Monroe St.
Suite 1213
Chicago, IL 60603
Tel (773) 480-0616
Fax (773) 453-3266
Attorney No. 30263
26
State of Illinois )
) ss
County of Cook )
VERIFICATION
The undersigned, having been first duly sworn, under oath deposes and affirms, that the
facts stated in the foregoing Verified Petition for Election Contest are true and correct to the best
of his knowledge and belief, as of the date signed, and as to statements made on information and
belief, the undersigned certifies as aforesaid that he verily believes the same to be true.
____________________________________________
Tim Meegan
Subscribed and sworn to before
me this ____ day of March 2015
by Tim Meegan.
_________________________________
Notary Public
(SEAL)
27
EXHIBIT A
Board of Election Commissioners
Unofficial Results
February 24, 2015
EXHIBIT B
Board of Election Commissioners
Unofficial Results
March 1, 2015
On
1 of 1
http://www.chicagoelections.com/en/pctlevel3.asp?Ward=33&elec_code...
2015 Municipal General - 2/24/15 -- Alderman 33rd Ward

Pct
Vote s Cast
TIM M EEGAN
267
323
302
271
122
89
57
56
239
296
461
286
10
308
11
101
183
73
77
108
273
12
70
276
13
242
14
109
15
322
16
403
17
309
18
58
40
139
126
129
127
300
19
62
235
20
311
21
280
22
348
23
307
24
140
123
71
115
138
478
25
99
326
26
53
186
27
211
28
195
96
67
8069
Total
Pct
126
205
Vote s Cast
%
109
2754
TIM M EEGAN
DEBORAH L. M ELL
40.82%
151
39.01%
106
40.40%
150
32.84%
124
27.80%
166
23.43%
123
34.12%
161
39.70%
182
25.52%
203
25.00%
113
39.56%
180
25.36%
158
23.97%
56
36.70%
135
43.17%
251
31.27%
132
41.75%
113
42.33%
125
26.38%
102
45.02%
129
43.93%
254
20.40%
130
37.46%
225
28.87%
171
30.37%
98
28.49%
84
45.50%
95
34.36%
4037
34.13%
%
%
120
DEBORAH L. M ELL
ANNISA WANAT
44.94%
46
46.75%
74
35.10%
32
55.35%
24
60.49%
17
69.46%
72
41.55%
117
34.92%
31
63.64%
28
65.91%
52
41.39%
26
65.22%
26
65.29%
13
51.38%
48
41.93%
26
62.28%
48
42.72%
60
37.67%
48
53.19%
69
32.80%
28
46.07%
23
72.99%
62
42.35%
115
47.07%
56
52.45%
35
52.69%
31
39.81%
33
48.72%
1278
50.03%
%
2015 Municipal General - 2/24/15 -- Alderman 33rd Ward
%
38
ANNISA WANAT
14.23%
14.24%
24.50%
11.81%
11.71%
7.11%
24.32%
25.38%
10.84%
9.09%
19.05%
9.42%
10.74%
11.93%
14.91%
6.45%
15.53%
20.00%
20.43%
22.19%
10.00%
6.61%
20.20%
24.06%
17.18%
18.82%
14.69%
16.92%
15.84%
%

33-Petition Exhibits v04

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

33-Petition Exhibits v04

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY

COUNTY DEPARTMENT, COUNTY DIVISION ELECTIONS

VERIFIED ELECTION CONTEST PETITION

Respondent, City of Chicago Board of Election Commissioners (Board), is the

Respondents, Deborah L. Mell (Mell) and Annisa Wanat (Wanat), were

corporate limits of the City of Chicago unless otherwise noted.

Voters Voting From Addresses Which Are Commercial Establishments

Absentee Voters Whose Applications Were Not Certified. Numerous voters

Absentee Voters Whose Applications Were Falsely Certified. Numerous voters

Absentee Ballot Carrier Envelope Missing. Numerous voters voted by absentee

Signature on Application for Absent Voters Ballot Different from Signature

Absentee Voters Who Failed To Sign The Absentee Ballot Envelope.

Absentee Ballots Not Properly Delivered. Numerous voters voted by absentee

Voters Who Voted In A Precinct In Which They were Not Registered.

No Application for Absentee Ballot. Numerous voters voted by absentee ballot

No Record of Voter Voting Absentee. Numerous voters purportedly voted by

his or her total for the precinct reduced by a whole vote.

Voters Improperly Permitted to Vote. Numerous registered and qualified voters

Improper Handling, Altering and/or Removal of Ballots from Precincts.

Absentee Voters Whose Applications Were Not Certified. Numerous voters

Absentee Voters Whose Applications Were Falsely Certified. Numerous voters

Absentee Ballot Carrier Envelope Missing. Numerous voters voted by absentee

Signature on Application for Absent Voters Ballot Different from Signature

Absentee Voters Who Failed To Sign The Absentee Ballot Envelope.

Absentee Ballots Not Properly Delivered. Numerous voters voted by absentee

Voters Who Voted In A Precinct In Which They were Not Registered.

No Application for Absentee Ballot. Numerous voters voted by absentee ballot

No Record of Voter Voting Absentee. Numerous voters purportedly voted by

Election Judges Issued Ballots Without Comparing Signatures on Ballot

Election Judge Improperly Influenced At Least Three Ballots Cast By

Election Judge Improperly Exerted Influence As Spanish Translator. On at

Ballots Mistakenly Not Counted. Numerous voters voted on ballots which,

Ballots Mistakenly, Erroneously or Fraudulently Counted. Numerous voters

Voters Were Impermissibly and Pervasively Electioneered at the Polling Places

Improper Handling, Altering, Abandonment and/or Removal of Ballots from

Election Judges Allowed Unauthorized Access to and Removal of Ballots.

Equipment Errors, or Failures. Equipment at numerous locations used for

Polling Places Not Staffed by Duly Qualified Judges. Numerous polling

Polling Place Relocated and/or Closed Without Adequate Notice to Voters.

Election Judges Who Were Not Properly Trained Erred In Consolidating

Total Ballots Cast on

247 (only one printed) Yes; 5 ballots

Total Ballots Cast on

Total Ballots Cast on

Total Ballots Cast on

0 (179 on wrong line) 188

319 (not consolidated) Not Printed

160 (not consolidated) Not Printed

Prayer For Relief

entering an expedited schedule for discovery and an evidentiary hearing in this

matter, prior to April 7, 2015;

and proofs of this petition; and

2015 Municipal General - 2/24/15 -- Alderman 33rd Ward

2015 Municipal General - 2/24/15 -- Alderman 33rd Ward

You might also like