2025 BND Voter Guide: Research candidates running in city, school & township elections
Welcome to the Belleville News-Democrat's 2025 Voter Guide for the April 1 election in Illinois.
Dozens of candidates are on the ballot running for mayor, city council, village board, township and school board seats across the metro-east.
The BND asked about 280 candidates in contested races to complete a detailed questionnaire so voters can learn more about their positions.
You can find candidates' answers by clicking on the appropriate hyperlinked categories below:
Belleville city and school board candidates
O'Fallon, Shiloh and Swansea municipal candidates
Municipal candidates in St. Clair County
Municipal candidates in Madison and Clinton counties
O'Fallon, Mascoutah and Millstadt school board races.
Cahokia, Collinsville, East St. Louis, Freeburg, Grant and Highland school board races
Metro-east township races
The early voting period has started and runs until March 31.
On Election Day, Tuesday, April 1, polls will be open 6 a.m. to 7 p.m.
If you have any questions or comments about the BND Voter Guide, email your message to Election2025@bnd.com.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Property taxes, book bans and resolutions: Three Grand Forks lawmakers discuss recent session
Jun. 6—GRAND FORKS — Through an hour-long conversation looking back on the 2025 legislative session, three Grand Forks state lawmakers found moments of agreement and professed similar opinions on issues more than they disagreed. Rep. Nels Christianson, Rep. Erik Murphy and Rep. Zac Ista, all from Grand Forks, went through some of the topics from the session with different mindsets but familiar answers. For example, on the matter of property tax and Gov. Kelly Armstrong's bill — which expanded the primary tax credit to a maximum $1,600 and capped local-level tax increases to no more than 3% annually — Christianson said they found some common ground. Property tax was one of the several issues discussed during the legislative wrap-up, held at the Grand Forks County office building on Thursday, June 5. All 18 members of districts 17, 18, 19, 20, 42 and 43 were invited, but Ista, Murphy and Christianson were the only ones in attendance. Joel Heitkamp, host of KFGO News and Views and a former state senator, served as moderator. Some issues involved public funding to private schools, Medicaid, the North Dakota Republican Party and what bills the legislators worked on. Property tax was among the most newsworthy issues during the session. Armstrong discussed it prior to his November election and his bill, HB 1176, was not passed until May 2, near the end of the session. "Did we deliver relief? Yes," Christianson said. "Reform? Maybe not so much." Murphy said property taxes are typically something outside of the Legislature's lane, but that he begrudgingly supported Armstrong's property tax bill. "Property tax is part of the reality of living in a nation such as ours," he said. "Property tax, to me, is a local issue." Ista, the only Democrat among the three, said there will be a trade-off. Homeowners will get some tax relief, but political subdivisions will have to figure out how to continue to pay for things. "Now the burden is going to fall on our local, county, city, school districts to see how to live within this new reality. I think it's going to be a challenge going forward for the state and locals to balance it," he said. One issue on which all three agreed was the matter of banning books. Each legislator was against it, though they had different thoughts on the matter. Ista said he has voted against every book censorship bill, and will continue to do so every chance he gets. "The issues in our state that affect our kids are not what books are displayed where in our libraries," he said. "I love taking my kids to Grand Forks Public Library and watch them go down that big pink slide, and I've never once worried about what book they might stumble into." Christianson said that, under no circumstances, should books be banned. Instead, he said, they should be placed in the appropriate area, and that he wants his daughters to be able to go around the children's section of the library and look at any books they would like in that section. "I absolutely do not support taking anything out of the ability for people to check out from the library," he said. "I just want to make sure that ... parents have a chance to be in the loop, just that parents can understand what their children are reading, especially in the younger ages." Murphy said there are better things to do and think about in North Dakota than book bans, and he mentioned Senate Bill 2307, which would have required libraries to make material considered sexually explicit unavailable to minors, and could penalize failure to comply. One issue he took with the bill was the difference between what was said about it versus what it would really do, he said. "What it really did is, opened up every library in the state, whether it's UND's library, it opened up the (North Dakota Museum of Art)," he said. "If there's a nude in there, that could be considered pornography, therefore we need to take that picture down." Two resolutions that failed during the session — House Concurrent Resolution 3013, which requested the U.S. Supreme Court overturn gay marriage, and House Concurrent Resolution 3020, declaring that "Christ is King" of North Dakota — drew disagreement between Christianson, who voted "yes" on both, and the other two legislators, who voted against them. Christianson's thought on HCR 3013 was that issues such as marriage need to be defined at the state level, not through a court decision, referencing Obergefell vs. Hodges, the 2015 U.S. Supreme Court ruling regarding same-sex marriages. Ista said that it was probably the darkest day of the session for him when the resolution came to the floor, and that he was caught "flat-footed" by it. He said he had thought everyone had moved beyond the issue of marriage equality. Murphy said it's not up to him to decide who any individual should love. He also said that during this recent school year, he knew of students who were transgender and transitioning. The resolution sends the wrong message to North Dakota residents and creates a division in the state, he said. As for HCR 3020, Murphy simply said "absolutely not" when Heitkamp asked if he thought North Dakota should be in the business of declaring that Christ is king. Ista said that the faith leaders in his life respected a foundational concept of no official religions in America, and that, while he respects the religion of his colleagues, the state should be accommodating to all religions and not place one above the others. Christianson said the resolution would have no effect on state policies, claiming that he voted for what he believes is the truth. "It was simply a statement, and that's a statement that I will make every day, that Christ is king," he said.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Eleven candidates are vying to succeed Gov. Murphy — who is endorsing them?
A former tennis star, a one-time House speaker, and Bruce Springsteen's guitarist are among those who have endorsed in the New Jersey governor's race. (Dana DiFilippo | New Jersey Monitor) The 11 candidates running to become New Jersey's next governor have a head-spinning list of people endorsing them, everyone from union leaders to celebrities and powerful politicians to obscure municipal officials. While endorsements typically do little to change election outcomes, political observers say they matter more in crowded primary races like New Jersey's, where they can sway undecided voters or serve as a tipping point in tight contests. The primaries are on Tuesday, June 10. 'Voters who are less familiar with the candidates and less informed about the race may use endorsements and establishment support as a guidepost,' said Alyssa Maurice, head of research at the William J. Hughes Center for Public Policy at Stockton University. 'But for voters who are very engaged and rallied around a preferred candidate, an endorsement is not going to change their mind. It's not going to be a game-changer.' Engaged voters likely will be the only people who bother to vote in Tuesday's primaries, with a recent Rutgers-Eagleton poll showing most registered voters aren't even aware an election is approaching. A low turnout could give endorsements more weight than they'd otherwise have and narrow slim margins between candidates in toss-up races, said Micah Rasmussen, director of the Rebovich Institute for New Jersey Politics at Rider University. In the race to replace Gov. Phil Murphy, former Assemblyman Jack Ciattarelli is considered the front-runner of five candidates in the GOP primary, while the six-candidate Democratic race remains wide open. 'In a low-turnout primary, where a small number of votes can shape the electorate, every group of votes matters,' Rasmussen said. 'Low turnout magnifies the effects of real endorsements that actually drive votes.' Endorsements only drive votes if they're backed up with money and canvassing to publicize them and deliver voters to the ballot box, he said. Some groups have proven especially adept at both, he added. He pointed to the Vaad in Lakewood, an influential coalition of Orthodox Jewish rabbis whose mobilizing helped Assemblyman Avi Schnall topple a four-term incumbent in 2023. 'They have like a high-tech phone tree where they make sure everybody knows, and everybody votes. That is an endorsement that very much matters. There's no question that's going to translate into votes,' Rasmussen said. The Vaad endorsed Ciattarelli and Rep. Josh Gottheimer, a Democrat, for governor in the upcoming primaries. The New Jersey Education Association, the union that represents about 200,000 teachers statewide, is another group whose endorsement carries weight — largely because teachers, like most college graduates, tend to vote more faithfully than other demographics, Rasmussen added. Sean Spiller, one of the six Democrats vying to become governor, landed that endorsement easily — he's the union's president. 'They're putting huge political capital into this endorsement, and I would argue that Spiller's candidacy wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for the NJEA endorsement,' Rasmussen said. 'It's completely symbiotic, in their case, they're joined at the hip. So there is very likely to be a lot of understanding among teachers in New Jersey of that endorsement.' Endorsements can cut both ways, he said. He noted that most of the campaign cash boosting Spiller's bid is funded by an outside group backed by teachers' dues, which irritated some union members and could make the endorsement backfire at the ballot box. George Norcross' endorsement of Democrat Steve Sweeney, the former Senate president, also raised some eyebrows. While many political candidates would want the powerful South Jersey Democratic power broker's backing, Norcross has plenty of critics, especially since he was indicted last year for racketeering (a judge dismissed the charges in February). Democrat Steve Fulop also has sought to make rival Rep. Mikie Sherrill's endorsements 'double-edged swords' by denigrating her as the establishment candidate, Rasmussen said. She has collected endorsements from party committees around the state. 'He's trying to make them into a liability, a sign that he's the unbossed candidate, he's the candidate that's building a new way of doing things,' Rasmussen said. Otherwise, endorsements largely align with the candidate's politics and signal something about them, Maurice said. Mayor Ras Baraka, a Democrat, won the support of a group of progressive groups like the New Jersey Working Families Party. 'Everyone has their unique lane, and I think their endorsements reflect that lane that they've chosen to run on,' she said. 'Sherrill won the most local endorsement contests with establishment Democrats, and institutional support. Sweeney has his South Jersey support. Baraka and Fulop have support from the anti-establishment or progressive groups. Spiller obviously has the teachers union.' The timing of endorsements also matters, Rasmussen and Maurice agreed. President Donald Trump endorsed Mendham Mayor Christine Serrano Glassner in her bid last year for U.S. Senate, but the endorsement came long before he was reelected, as he fought corruption charges in Manhattan. Serrano Glassner lost in the GOP primary to Republican Curtis Bashaw, who then lost in the general election to Democrat Andy Kim, now New Jersey's junior senator. Since Trump's reelection, the Republican candidates vying for governor — aside from Sen. Jon Bramnick, a longtime anti-Trumper — battled fiercely for both his endorsement and the support of his devotees (Ciattarelli won Trump's support). Whichever GOP candidate wins the primary, though, that strategy will likely change for November's election, Maurice said. 'That candidate is going to have to walk a tightrope when it comes to Trump and how much to align himself with the President,' she said. 'The effect of a Trump endorsement in the general will really depend on the political mood come November, because a lot can change, so time will tell.' Other notable endorsements in the governor's race include: Baraka — Reps. Bonnie Watson Coleman and LaMonica McIver, Make the Road Action New Jersey, New Jersey Citizen Action, the Good Government Coalition of New Jersey, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee Bramnick — The Philadelphia Inquirer, former House Speaker John Boehner Ciattarelli — The New Jersey State Retired Police and Firemen's Association Fulop — College Democrats of New Jersey, The Philadelphia Inquirer, Progressive Change Campaign Committee Gottheimer — Assemblyman Gary Schaer, guitarist Stevie Van Zandt Republican Mario Kranjac — Newt Gingrich and Curtis Sliwa (founder of the Guardian Angels) Sherrill — Former tennis star Billie Jean King, Sierra Club, Maine Gov. Janet Mills Republican Bill Spadea — Right to Life (state and national) Sweeney — Reps. Donald Norcross and Herb Conaway and about 25 union chapters SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Chicago Tribune
3 hours ago
- Chicago Tribune
Federal vs. state power at issue in a hearing over Trump's election overhaul executive order
BOSTON — Democratic state attorneys general on Friday will seek to block President Donald Trump's proposal for a sweeping overhaul of U.S. elections in a case that tests a constitutional bedrock — the separation of powers. The top law enforcement officials from 19 states filed a federal lawsuit after the Republican president signed the executive order in March, arguing that its provisions would step on states' power to set their own election rules and that the executive branch had no such authority. In a filing supporting that argument, a bipartisan group of former secretaries of state said Trump's directive would upend the system established by the Constitution's Elections Clause, which gives states and Congress control over how elections are run. They said the order seeks to 'unilaterally coronate the President as the country's chief election policymaker and administrator.' Elon Musk's threat to withdraw Dragon capsule would leave NASA with 1 option: RussiaIf the court does not halt the order, they argued, 'the snowball of executive overreach will grow swiftly and exponentially.' Trump's election directive was part of a flurry of executive orders he has issued in the opening months of his second term, many of which have drawn swift legal challenges. It follows years of him falsely claiming that his loss to Democrat Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election was due to widespread fraud and an election year in which he and other Republicans promoted the notion that large numbers of noncitizens threatened the integrity of U.S. elections. In fact, voting by noncitizens is rare and, when caught, can lead to felony charges and deportation. Trump's executive order would require voters to show proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections, prohibit mail or absentee ballots from being counted if they are received after Election Day, set new rules for voting equipment and prohibit non-U.S. citizens from being able to donate in certain elections. It also would condition federal election grant funding on states adhering to the strict ballot deadline. The hearing Friday in U.S. District Court in Boston comes in one of three lawsuits filed against the executive order. One is from Oregon and Washington, where elections are conducted almost entirely by mail and ballots received after Election Day are counted as long as they are postmarked by then. The provision that would create a proof-of-citizenship requirement for federal elections already has been halted in a lawsuit filed by voting and civil rights groups and national Democratic organizations. In that case, filed in federal court in the District of Columbia, the judge said the president's attempt to use a federal agency to enact a proof-of-citizenship requirement for voting usurped the power of states and Congress, which at the time was considering legislation that would do just that. That bill, called the SAVE Act, passed the U.S. House but faces an uncertain future in the Senate. Trump's executive order said its intent was to ensure 'free, fair and honest elections unmarred by fraud, errors, or suspicion.' The Justice Department, in arguing against the motion by the attorneys general for a preliminary injunction, said the president is within his rights to direct agencies to carry out federal voting laws. The order tasks the U.S. Election Assistance Commission with updating the federal voter registration form to require people to submit documentation proving they are U.S. citizens. Similar provisions enacted previously in a handful of states have raised concerns about disenfranchising otherwise eligible voters who can't readily access those documents. That includes married women, who would need both a birth certificate and a marriage license if they had changed their last name. A state proof-of-citizenship law enacted in Kansas more than a decade ago blocked the registrations of 31,000 people later found to be eligible to vote. The two sides will argue over whether the president has the authority to direct the election commission, which was created by Congress as an independent agency after the Florida ballot debacle during the 2000 presidential election. In its filing, the Justice Department said Trump's executive order falls within his authority to direct officials 'to carry out their statutory duties,' adding that 'the only potential voters it disenfranchises are noncitizens who are ineligible to vote anyway.'
