Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Ballot crisis may be averted

Two candidates didn't send a letter accepting a ballot spot. That could have disqualified them. But it might be waived.

By ANDREW MEACHAM
Published January 26, 2005

MADEIRA BEACH - City officials got welcome news on Tuesday from the state, ending a day-old legal crisis.

After word spread on Monday that two candidates for the March 8 elections might go down on a technicality, suspicions were running high.

"I can tell you right now, that's why you can't get decent people to run for office," said Art Thomas, a commission hopeful. "They're hijacking an election."

While a rule detailing how a candidate accepts a nomination might seem like procedural minutiae, the revelations threatened to undo the candidacies of Thomas and Mayor Charles Parker.

Then officials found a state legal adviser who told them that the city could either waive the offending rule or start over. They have drafted city attorney Donald O'Leary to enter the fray.

City Clerk Denise Schlegel said she has taken responsibility for not including the acceptance letter on a list of required to-do's given to all candidates in their packets.

Yet the rule requiring that candidates accept their nominations, in writing, within five working days after qualifying is hardly news. Sixty-nine percent of voters approved it on a March 2004 referendum.

The rule, now a part of the city charter that candidates also receive with their packets, describes this notification as a condition of being placed on the ballot.

Monday drew a flurry of calls following a reporter's visit to the City Clerk's Office. Calls to candidates, the city manager, the city attorney and the state elections commission produced no immediate strategy by the city.

By Tuesday, City Manager Jill Silverboard said that the city will pursue an option recommended by the city attorney to propose waiving the notification requirement for March 8. That would mean two special meetings, the first as early as Thursday.

In the mayor's race, candidate Doreen Moore filed an acceptance letter in time. Incumbent Parker did not.

In the race for District 3 commissioner, Jim Madden filed a prompt letter; his opponent, Thomas, did not. Neither did Martha Boos, running unopposed for the District 4 commissioner's seat.

Thomas said he did not know about the law, even though it was in the city charter accompanying his candidate packet.

"You read this stuff but you don't read every word," he said.

All candidates lacking acceptance letters supplied them on Monday, at Schlegel's behest. By the statute, they missed the deadline. But if the state's advice holds up, it will not matter. The city can waive the requirement for the March elections - or start them all over.

Schlegel said she learned of these options on Tuesday from Sharon Larson, an assistant general counsel for the secretary of state. Larson could not be reached for comment.

Madden said he was reading through his materials, trying to construct a timeline for the campaign, when he noticed the requirement. Despite legalese like "hereinbefore," the language is unambiguous. Any qualified person who wants to appear on the ballot has five working days to accept the nomination.

"It's pretty much like following a recipe when you're cooking," Madden said. "There are just so many things that you have to do in an election."

Roger Koske served on the commission that drafted that charter amendment. Koske said he dimly remembers the legislation, which might have come about as a hedge against candidates trying to tip an election to a third party.

"Probably in our thinking at that time was, we're not going to let somebody ball up a ballot and say at the last second I'm going to drop out so my candidate will get my votes,' or something like that."

Moore served alongside Koske and now opposes Parker for mayor. Moore noted that the amendment candidates say they did not know about was passed by voters and the subject of workshops. Hence, Moore said, candidates should know about it.

"I just don't think you can pick and choose the parts of the charter you want to comply with."

Parker served on that same commission, but said he does not remember the rule about notifying the city clerk within five days. He blames the city attorney for not notifying the city clerk, the city manager and candidates about the change.

Thomas Trask was city attorney when the referendum passed. Donald O'Leary, who has taken over the job since, could not be reached for comment.

"Obviously, there was a mistake made within the administrative framework of the city," Parker said. "And we, the candidates, should not have to be penalized for that."

As mayor, Parker twice reviewed and passed an amendment to Section 3 of the charter, which contains the five-day notification rule, on Nov. 30 and Dec. 14. Parker said that amending a section would probably entail reviewing all of that section. But he said he does not remember what the commission reviewed or did not review.

One recollection comes through loud and clear: that when the amendment was drafted, Moore was a commissioner and Madden the city manager.

"From what I've been able to glean, they just by total coincidence did submit the document they were supposed to submit in conformance with that," Parker said. "Which makes one wonder what is going on."

Thomas said he thought his job was done when he completed all 10 items on a checklist given to him by Schlegel. That pack of forms, oaths and disclosures got him qualified. But the ordinance covers what a candidate must do after qualifying.

Thomas pointed to Moore and Madden as architects of legal trickery.

"When he was the city manager and she was on the commission, they planted this little time bomb here, knowing that they could basically use it in the future to regain power."

When Madden learned of the city's possible strategy to waive the notification requirement, he said, "It's interesting that we can waive the laws that the voters approve, and that's basically what happened."

Lori Hudson, a deputy administrator for the Pinellas County supervisor of elections, said a city clerk acts as a supervisor of elections within cities.

"I can't really speak to their city code," Hudson said of Madeira Beach. "But obviously if they have got something different in their code that affects their elections, that's going to be under the purview of the city clerk."

Hudson said it is too soon to predict the outcome of a conflict that could arise from legal challenges for or against the charter. "That's an interesting legal dilemma," she said.

[Last modified January 26, 2005, 00:13:15]