ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, IL — Today, Americans for Prosperity-Illinois (AFP-IL) deputy state director Brian Costin filed objections to Township High School District 214’s September 3 investigative report concerning two taxpayer-funded telephone surveys connected to the District’s bond referendum.
The self-facilitated “investigative” report comes after AFP-IL filed an ethics complaint alleging the misuse of taxpayer resources for referendum polling, voter surveying and related campaign activity. District 214 retained Fagen, Friedman & Fulfrost, also known as F3 Law, to conduct an independent investigation.
AFP-IL is now challenging the credibility of that investigation, asking the District 214 Board to send the complaint, investigative report, objections and supporting records to Cook County State’s Attorney Eileen O’Neill Burke for an independent review. Additionally, Costin directs the Board to request that State’s Attorney Burke seek a formal opinion from Attorney General Kwame Raoul.
AFP Deputy State Director Brian Costin issued the following statement:
“Local governments cannot violate the State Ethics Act or apply local ethics rules that are less restrictive than state law. District 214 is attempting to rewrite state law by creating a timing exception that appears nowhere in the Ethics Act or its own policy. You cannot retroactively legislate your way out of doing something illegal.
“When a local government tests tax amounts, measures voter support, develops messaging based on the results and then launches a taxpayer-funded ‘Renew 214’ campaign, it is using public resources to influence the election in its favor.
“AFP-IL will continue to work to ensure Illinois laws are followed, and taxpayers have a fair fight in tax-hike referendums.”
BACKGROUND:
Illinois’ State Officials and Employees Act requires local ethics rules to be no less restrictive than state law. Neither Board Policy 2:105 nor the Ethics Act creates an exception for surveys conducted before the referendum in question is formally placed on the ballot.
The F3 Law report found that District 214 did not contest that polling of prospective voters occurred. However, the report reasoned: “Because the surveys in question were posed prior to any referendum being placed on the ballot,” the District’s actions appeared outside the policy’s scope.
Costin argues that no such exemption appears in state law or District 214’s policy.
Brian Costin is available for interviews — email cgallagher@standtogether.org to arrange.
