Foster Asks Judge Bellis To Intervene In Choosing Election Moderators–City Disputes Assertions

UPDATE, includes city’s response: Attorneys for Democratic candidate for mayor Mary-Jane Foster have asked Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellis to order Democratic Registrar of Voters Santa Ayala to “hold a lottery for appointing Moderators at the 23 polling places during the September 27, 2011 Democratic Primary in Bridgeport. The lottery for moderators shall be between Plantiffs’ 12 choices, and Defendant’s 12 choices.”

Lawyers Alan Neigher and Michele Mount, who successfully argued Foster on the September 27 primary ballot, submitted a request to the court for Ayala to establish a lottery system for selecting moderators and assistant registrars overseeing the Democratic primary. Foster’s lawyers, in a brief to the court, assert Ayala has ignored the campaign’s request for input in moderator selection. See the Foster legal brief below followed by the city’s response by Deputy City Attorney Art Laske on behalf of Ayala disputing Foster’s assertions. Judge Bellis is expected to hear arguments Tuesday morning:

MOTION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO ORDER DEFENDANT REGISTRAR TO EMPLOY A LOTTERY FOR SELECTION OF MODERATORS AND ASSISTANT REGISTRARS

At the close of proceedings on Friday September 2, 2011, Plaintiffs requested that the Court retain jurisdiction through the primary election to be held on September 27, 2011. The Court agreed to retain jurisdiction. As expected, the need for this Court’s intervention has again become apparent.

For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiffs respectfully request a writ of mandamus ordering Defendant Registrar to hold a lottery for appointing Moderators at Bridgeport’s 23 polling places during the September 27, 2011 Democratic Primary. The lottery for moderators should be between Plaintiff’s 12 choices, and Defendant’s 12 choices. Further, Plaintiffs request that the Defendant Registrar station the Plaintiff’s choices of Assistant Registrars at polling places where Plaintiffs’ choices of moderators were situated, and at fifty (50%) percent of any other polling places that remain available.

On August 22, 2011 (several hours before the Defendant Registrar rejected the Plaintiffs’ primary petitions) the Plaintiff submitted a request for half of the positions available on Election Day to work at the polling places. C.G.S. § 9-436(e) states in relevant part:

The registrar shall designate one of the moderators so appointed by the registrar to be head moderator or shall appoint as head moderator an elector who is not also moderator of a polling place and who shall be deemed a primary official … Each registrar’s appointments of primary polling place officials, except moderators of polling places, and of designees to conduct supervised voting of absentee ballots pursuant to sections 9-159q and 9-159r shall be divided equally, as nearly as may be, between designees of the party-endorsed candidates and designees of one or more of the contestants … Names of designees and alternate designees for such positions shall be submitted in writing by party-endorsed candidates and contestants to the registrar not later than ten days before the primary, except that names of designees and alternate designees for the position of moderator shall be so submitted not later than twenty-one days before the primary and, if such lists are not so presented, all such appointments shall be made by the registrar but in the above-mentioned proportion …”

After this Court issued its Order of September 2, 2011, an attorney for the Plaintiffs (M. Mount) had a discussion with Defendant’s attorney, the Deputy City Attorney, Arthur Laske, who stated that Plaintiffs had until the close of business (Thursday, September 8, 2011) to request moderators. On or about 2:30 p.m. on September 8, 2011, Plaintiffs submitted a list of three (3) certified moderators, intending to add at least 7 more by 5:00 p.m. However, Defendant Registrar refused to place any of the moderators submitted by Plaintiffs. The Defendant Registrar stated that the positions were already filled and would not accept any of Plaintiffs’ suggested moderators.

Moreover as shown by the Court’s decision on September 2, 2011, the Plaintiffs have already been adversely affected by the Defendant Registrar’s partisan and improper decisions in this primary contest. The electors of the City of Bridgeport must be confident in the ability and willingness of the Bridgeport Registrar to administer fair and free elections.

Defendant Registrar has demonstrably failed to show that she has either the will or the ability to overcome partisanship in order to conduct a fair primary election here. As this Court noted in its September 2, 2011 opinion, in Buckley v. American Constitutional Law Foundation, Inc., 525 U.S. 182, 186-87 (1999) the United States Supreme Court held: “We have also recognized, however, that there must be a substantial regulation of elections if they are to be fair and honest and if some sort of order, rather than chaos, is to accompany the democratic process” (citations omitted). The need for this Court’s intervention was made clear by the Defendant Registrar’s conduct regarding rejection of Plaintiffs’ primary petitions. It is made ever more apparent now, in her blatantly unreasonable refusal to provide the means for and even appearance of a fair primary.

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing and as a precaution to any potential Election Day violations and the need for post-primary litigation, Plaintiffs respectfully request a writ of mandamus to require Defendant Registrar to provide Plaintiffs’ choices for poll workers at fifty (50%) percent of the positions available.

Deputy City Attorney Art Laske’s response:

DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

The undersigned counsel, on behalf of Defendant, Santa Ayala, hereby submits the following response to the plaintiff’s September 12, 2011 Motion for Writ of Mandamus. In doing so, the undersigned represents to the Court the following facts that were not included in the Plaintiff’s filing:

1. A conversation did take place on September 2, 2011 between the undersigned and Attorney Michelle Mount. In that conversation, a discussion took place regarding amending the schedule regarding the submission of names from the Foster campaign for election day poling positions including the position of moderator and all other poll workers. Pursuant to C.G.S. Sec. 9-436(d), the names of proposed certified moderators were to have been submitted by the Foster campaign 21 days prior to the September 13, 2011 primary (which would have been August 22, 2011)1. As a result of the Court moving the election date to September 27, 2011, the statutorily required date to file moderator’s names would have been Tuesday, September 6, 2011. In order to accommodate Foster campaign, Attorney Mount requested from the City additional time to names its proposed moderators, to which the City had no objection. Attorney Mount requested until the end of the day Thursday, September 8, 2011 to provide qualified moderators to be considered by the registrar, and this extension for submission of potential moderator’s names was agreed upon;

1 It should be noted that the deadline for the Foster Campaign to have submitted proposed moderator’s names for the originally scheduled September 13th primary would have been on August 22, 2011. Although the Registrar’s decision to reject the Foster campaign’s petitions was issued at the end of the day on August 22nd, no proposed names of potential moderators had ever been submitted to the Registrar by the Foster Campaign for the September 13, 2011 primary pursuant to the deadline imposed by C.G.S Sec. 9-436, though this deadline passed before the Registrar had formally notified the campaign of the rejection of its petitions.

2. During the afternoon of Thursday, September 8, 2011, the Plaintiff submitted six names of individuals to be proposed as moderators to the registrar prior to 5:00 p.m. The registrar received the email with the names listed and sought to determine the qualifications of the proposed moderators. At no time on the 8th of September did the Registrar “refuse” to place any of the names submitted by the campaign;

3. Upon review of the six names submitted by the Plaintiff2 it became apparent that one of the names submitted was not on the Secretary of State’s list of certified moderators, and none of the proposed moderators were “… among the enrolled party members in the municipality or political subdivision holding the primary” (See, C.G.S. Sec. 9-436(c)), but rather it appeared that the only certified moderators proposed by the Foster campaign were electors of Monroe (3) and Newtown (2).

4. The undersigned spoke with Attorney Mount on Friday afternoon regarding the apparent applicability of state statutes governing the Registrar’s authority to fill moderator’s positions from among enrolled party members from the municipality in which the primary is taking place. While the Registrar, in anticipation of a September 13, 2011 primary date, had received from other petitioning candidates proposed names of poll workers, and had prepared a list of proposed moderators (which she forwarded to the Foster campaign on Wednesday, September 7, 2011), the Registrar had also stated to the Foster campaign that ‘although the certified moderator list has been submitted to the Town Clerk … you will note that they have been tentatively assigned; we are willing to discuss possible changes with your campaign staff”;

2 Despite a written request to include the “name, address, telephone and social security number” of each of the proposed moderators, as well as to indicate that they had been previously certified by the Secretary of State, of the six names submitted on September 8th, one is not listed as being certified by the Secretary of State, none had addresses listed, only two had phone numbers listed, and no social security numbers were included in the Foster Campaign’s submission of names to the Registrar.

5. At no time has the Foster campaign submitted to the Registrar of Voters any names of any Bridgeport residents who are certified to act as moderators, either by the prior deadline of August 22, 2011, or within the agreed upon deadline for submission of Thursday, September 8, 2011 or since. The Campaign still has until 4:00 pm on September 16, 2011 to submit proposed names of any other poll workers (non-moderator positions) pursuant to C.G.S. Sec. 9-436;

6. Despite the statutory requirements regarding the appointment of moderators as being residents of Bridgeport, Plaintiff now seeks to have this Court issue a Writ of Mandamus requiring a lottery for moderator’s positions in violation of statutory deadlines, including unknown and unnamed individuals asserted by the Foster campaign to be qualified and certified moderators under the law, and based on an argument that the registrar is improperly following prescribed statutory requirements. These assertions, based on unfounded assertions that the Registrar is refusing the Foster campaign fair consideration of its proposed moderators, attempts to excuse the fact that the Foster campaign never submitted proposed moderators in anticipation of the September 13, 2011 primary prior to August 22, 2011, and that when the campaign was afforded additional time to submit names to the Registrar for the September 27, 2011 primary it only submitted five certified names before the deadline, and apparently the campaign did not have any Bridgeport residents to propose who were certified moderators. A balancing of the equities in this situation is required by the Court, and therefore a Writ of Mandamus should not issue, and the Defendant respectfully requests the opportunity to be heard on this matter.

0
Share

56 comments

  1. Smart move by Mount to block the hijacking of this election. Lessons learned from when Mount successfully represented city interests. She knows election law and this move may prevent a potential Caruso Redux.

    0
  2. This move is fantastic and eases some anxiety for me. There seems to be no end of dirty tricks from the Finch campaign. I wonder if the extremely low turnout in Bridgeport is perhaps due to the hopelessness voters might feel about their ability to really vote for change. I was feeling it and if this election is stolen from Mary-Jane … (and I hate to say it) I will feel like giving up on Bridgeport.

    0
  3. Santa Ayala should be in jail not in the registrars’ office. Candidates were always given 50% of the moderators. I guess Finch & Company have given her the orders. It’s time for Merrill to step in and I believe it’s time for the justice department to step in and insure our voting rights are protected.
    Santa, you are a disgrace. Resign now before you get yourself arrested. Dumb ass.

    0
  4. tc, I wanted to clarify my post from the other day. From the outside looking in MJF’s campaign is in trouble, she has shown a lack of BRIDGEPORT basic knowledge (the New Haven thing). You don’t have a caravan with less than 100 vehicles in a Citywide election and any “rally” should have triple (300 people or more) that. My suggestion for future rallies, “get a band or two.” Forget any more debates unless you can get ch.12 to host or televise one. I missed her at the event at McLevy Green last week, but she shouldn’t miss any public events. She might want to let J. Gomes be the face of her campaign instead of JB.

    0
    1. Events are over! Time to ID! ID!! and ID!!!
      Maybe she should get an RV for election day. Maybe she could get Tom Bucci Jr. to be her treasurer. Maybe we need less Bridgeport and more Mary-Jane!

      0
    2. Hector, give me a break. When was the last time you saw an election with a 100-car caravan? Never!!!
      We went to a lot of locations and were well received. 100 cars is unmanageable.
      Hector where were we going to put the bands? In the trunks of cars?
      We attended all the debates we were invited to, we did not miss one. We did not run these debates and the news media was informed.
      MJF has not missed a public event yet. Jason is not the face of the campaign, neither is John Gomes.
      MARY-JANE FOSTER IS THE FACE OF THE CAMPAIGN.
      Your reluctance to get involved with MJF speaks volumes.

      0
    3. Hector A. Diaz // Sep 12, 2011 at 2:47 pm
      to your posting

      Hector,
      I just love your Monday-morning quarterbacking. Also I am so pleased to see you at headquarters lending a hand to replace this despicable administration which is hellbent on destroying the good record of yet another competent City employee.
      Her disciplinary hearing is tomorrow for trumped-up charges by Nunn and Norton, the real Dolly Sisters of this administration. Perhaps you can give some of your quarterbacking lessons to her as well … as she’s about to lose her job on trumped-up charges.
      What? You’ve never been to headquarters? Oh well, you must be at somebody else’s headquarters … my mistake.

      0
      1. tc, I’ve seen quite a few REAL CARAVANS with 100s of vehicles. Mary-Jane’s never asked me for any help. At this point the campaign’s missteps are a helluvalot louder than me not getting involved. I am a true Democrat and will support the winner of the primary (though I do consider Rick Torres a friend).

        0
        1. Hector, what is a true Democrat? Is it someone who toes the party line no matter how bad it is and how much it hurts the residents or is it someone who cares about the city and its residents? I know the answer, Do You?
          Hector, if you knew the answer you would not be in the Finch Camp.

          0
        2. Not only was The Foster Caravan fun, the reception was outstanding. It was even more interesting when Mayor Bill Finch had the misfortune of turning onto Knowlton Street at the tail end of the caravan. For five blocks Finch was actually part of the Mary-Jane Foster for Mayor rally. I know Knowlton Street. North Main and Madison would have been my choice–lol lol lol lol. We did have a blast Mr. Diaz. It’s been about 25 years since I last saw you. Stop down at Headquarters sometime. Always nice to be part of a winning team!!!

          0
          1. Steven, thank you for the invite. I hope you understand my critique was meant to be constructive. Good Luck.

            0
        1. If there was a 100-car caravan then you were the only one who saw it. As far as MJF goes, if you where interested in helping here you could have called her. If memory serves me correctly you were thinking about running for town clerk, in fact you asked for my support. MJF may have thought and rightfully so, you were in the Finch camp which you are. My suggestion, support Torres.
          The missteps about the caravan and the bands and 300 people are all bullshit made up by you. Just remember Hector I am too old a cat to be screwed by a kitten.

          0
          1. tc, the first time I saw a Caravan was during an election for Governor on the great island of Puerto Rico. The vehicles numbered in the hundreds, maybe thousands (if you wish look it up). I love how you can suppose to know me or who I intend to vote for or support. I’ve let both candidates know I am supporting neither at this point so if you think I may be calling you a LIAR in that, YES, you’d be correct.

            0
          2. Hector, coming from you I expect to be called a liar. I know you like a book. You are a political opportunist looking for a job. You were contemplating a run for town clerk and had Mitch Robles trying to line up support. Anyone wanting to run on the Finch ticket is a Finch supporter. You just don’t have the balls to say so.
            BTW that 1,000-car caravan you saw in PR might as well have been held in Somalia when it comes time to verify. Hector, how many 100 car caravans have you seen in Bridgeport?

            0
          3. The part about the Caravans in Puerto Rico is true. However, the opposing party always shows the same strength in Caravan numbers. But most importantly, we are not in Puerto Rico.

            0
  5. The deadline for submitting moderators was actually 9/5, and the only thing at stake is whether the campaign can force the city to accept out-of-town moderators (or out-of-town people who have not been trained as moderators) in place of Bridgeport residents.

    The lawsuit strikes me as petty–especially since the city gave a grace period they weren’t required to give.

    0
    1. Petty? This is Bridgeport, not Mayberry. Santa Ayala is beholden to one master: Mario Testa. It isn’t Finch. He didn’t want the job to begin with. Now he wants it because he and Sonya are enjoying fabulous wealth at the taxpayers’ expense.

      0
      1. When I said petty I meant it showed they’re more focused on needling Ayala than in assembling 50%+1 of the votes. Without betraying confidences, the Foster team had other options they could have pursued without it coming to this.

        0
        1. matt // Sep 12, 2011 at 4:29 pm
          to your posting

          Matt,
          You want us to believe you’re in the know?
          So you’re the one to talk to Lasky?
          I don’t think so …
          Get real, Matt … This is the Democratic Machine with Mario and Bill. Your option would be to roll over and play dead …

          0
        2. They’re not needling Ayala, just ensuring the electoral process is fair. I’m not doubting the Foster camp had other options. This is the most effective. The courts will keep the election honest and expose the corrupt political machine that is the DTC under Mario Testa.

          0
          1. matt // Sep 12, 2011 at 5:09 pm
            “you want us to believe you’re in the know?”

            matt // Sep 12, 2011 at 5:09 pm
            “you want us to believe you’re in the know?”

            matt // Sep 12, 2011 at 5:40 pm
            By the way, Carolanne, I’m the person who sent you the court decision on 9/2.

            To your postings
            Thank you for your kindness in providing me with a copy of the decision …

            matt // Sep 12, 2011 at 5:09 pm
            “you want us to believe you’re in the know?”

            Feel free to check.

            matt // Sep 12, 2011 at 5:40 pm
            By the way, Carolanne, I’m the person who sent you the court decision on 9/2.
            Did you talk to Art Laske as I asked …

            Thank you for sending the decision but your comments don’t reflect the point you are trying to make here with me.

            By the way, Carolanne, I’m the person who sent you the court decision on 9/2.

            0
    2. Matt, we are looking for out-of-town registrars. Moderators can do a lot to hurt a campaign. Its always been moderators were split by competing sides. Not this year.

      0
    3. matt // Sep 12, 2011 at 3:07 pm
      to your posting

      Matt,
      You strike me as petty
      No my friend, this is not the only thing at stake … For your information … it’s the democratic process that is at stake in Bridgeport.
      The City did not give a grace period, the judge imposed a two-week period for the Foster campaign because Mario, Bill and Santa colluded to deny Mary-Jane a place on the ballot …
      Where have you been?
      Not at our headquarters or you would have known this …

      0
      1. Colluded is a good choice of a word. Very polite, Carolanne. I would’ve used conspired. Finch and Testa must be aware of the scrutiny this election is likely to draw. Too many people are watching. Mario Testa’s name has been in the news too often, not once in relation to a positive development. They must be freaking out–the house of cards is about to come tumblin’ down.

        0
    4. tc, you DON’T know me and you probably never will, in fact I’d wager to say you have NO idea who I am. I wouldn’t suppose to know someone let alone their thoughts without a conversation, but through your post and your PRE-judging of me, oh and the SOMALIA thing, you pretty much give an impression of being prejudiced. By the way I also approached J. Gomes about the Town Clerk seat and would have approached MJF if she had not said she wasn’t running any other candidates. (o.o) (not completely truthful either!)

      0
      1. Hector, you and I have had many, many conversations. I know you just like I know all of those supporting Finch, you are all cut from the same cloth. What’s in it for me!!!
        BTW the comparison to Somalia was in reference to the info you posted about a thousand-car caravan.
        Hector, yours is a tired story. Enough already, ride off into the sunset.

        0
        1. tc, those conversations must have been very one-sided. Up until a few years ago I only knew you as Mrs. Fardy’s husband. By trying to clarify the Somalia thing you proved my point.

          0
          1. Hector are you really suffering from TDA? I have known you for years but never mind. Now to the Somalia thing, stop trying to turn it into a racial thing. What was meant was I have as much of a chance confirming a 1,000-car caravan in Somalia as I do in PR. Do you understand now?

            0
  6. Always good to have monitors. Some say, though, the prior Mayoral election was make or break on one thing: absentee ballots.

    What is the number of absentee ballots and what is the number by which the mayor won the election?

    The LWV has attempted to do some work on the absentee ballot issue. Who is actually bringing these ballots to the voters and who oversees this?

    Then there are many possible irregularities at the voting booth itself. Many issues, I have heard some of them, which really show how some are beating the system. Long list. Here is one. If you don’t have a driver’s license, how do you verify residence?

    Anyway, we had this group on the show with the LWV president after the ballot shortage (another state vs. city issue) and this group was good at indicating issues at hand in Bridgeport with voting: www .ctvoterscount.org

    In unrelated news, tomorrow we discuss the history of pirates in Bridgeport. Special guest on the TV show: author of recently published book on privateer and founder of the customs house built in 1772 in what was then called the “Upper Wharves.”

    0
  7. I have lived and worked many a primary and have NEVER seen anything like I have seen coming out of the Finch Campaign.
    1. Registrar declares MJF did not qualify for ballot.
    2. Bill Finch holds rally and mocks the fact MJF wears jewelry and pearls and lives by Saint Mary’s.
    3. Absentee Ballots are being mailed to the wrong addresses.
    4. Santa Ayala decides she will name all the moderators. Never done before.
    5. People looking for their AB’s are told their district has not been mailed out yet. BS.
    6. People going to town clerk’s office told they did not print enough AB applications.
    7. Select whites in the North End are told MJF is using Ernie Newton and they should be worried.
    The list goes on.
    To the people in the Finch camp and I don’t mean all of you parasites with city jobs. How can you look at yourself in the mirror while all of this is going on? Shame on You.

    0
    1. It is disgusting the party machine is attempting yet again to deny the people of the city of Bridgeport their right to due process and a representative government elected by the people, FOR THE PEOPLE.

      Seems to me the Finch campaign and Mario Testa AKA the devil in the pasta joint were fairly cocky a few weeks ago, sending a couple of mincing, lisping, limp-wristed gay men onto OIB to taunt the regulars. All they could do was brag about their tastes in women’s footwear and preference for overpriced alcoholic beverages and say we would all have to kiss Mario Testa’s ring and beg his forgiveness. WRONG. Judge Bellis ruled on the side of democracy. The drag queens left the room shortly afterward.

      The legal challenge to Santa Ayala’s rejection of the primary petition served notice to the Finch/Testa/Peckerwood triumvirate that Mary-Jane Foster is not a person to be fucked with. The Foster camp has shown no compunction about taking the machine to court. Now the Finch camp is desperate. One last attempt to manipulate the absentee ballots, which will almost certainly be challenged in a court of law. The machinations of the Finch camp are the last twitches of a dying animal.

      The cretins who owe their municipal jobs to the DTC ought to be updating their résumés and drafting cover letters, not conspiring to discredit the city one more time. Shame on them is right.

      0
  8. There is no low too low for the machine. There must be more than a small possibility losing the mayor’s office will expose most if not all of the corruption engineered by Mario Testa.

    0
  9. Bill Finch holds a rally and criticizes Mary-Jane Foster for wearing jewelry and living near Saint Mary’s by the Sea? If that’s all he can dredge up he must be more than a little nervous about losing the election.

    0
  10. I have a very close friend in the Finch camp, and she tells me every other day the shit hits the fan.
    Mario’s afraid of pissing off the Judge, and he thinks the phones are tapped.
    She tells me Finch’s camp is on Defcon 1.
    You can’t make this stuff up!

    0
    1. Maybe the phones are tapped. The FBI and the Department of Justice enjoy working political corruption cases in Bridgeport. It’s like shooting fish in a barrel for them.

      0
  11. I have been away on “financial duty” recently, trying to check up on the facts, just the facts. But when the truth is stretched as far as Mayor Finch indicated in his $150,000 budget surplus, but no year-end report, in the Keila Torres article, it’s almost hard to call the information factual. Trust, maybe, maybe not, but verify!

    Yesterday’s 9-11-01 remembrances brought home to me the powerful impressions I had walking away from Wall Street 10 years ago with the mass exodus as buildings were evacuated around noon. People on both sides of erected barricades were respectful of each other, old, young, uniforms, suits or tennis sneakers, from all nations including women wearing head scarves, they all passed peacefully as any other member of that awestruck group.

    And we have gone to Iraq and we have been in Afghanistan and we are trying to teach people of other cultures about democracy? Very interesting, isn’t it to consider how Bridgeport is looked at.
    There is a view from I-95, a view from the water, a view of the brownfields, and a perspective from the articles that put the City in the newspaper. Our City government is really tottering when the Mayor declares our City Charter easy to disregard, ineffective, and ‘passed by convention.’ If that is his conclusion, when did he convene a group as a Charter convention to make the changes? What he has done with the City Attorney and outside counsel is to ignore that which is inconvenient, that can be kept secret and away from most of the public most of the time. Ignorant, shameful and abusive.

    It might be interesting to gather a list of how many City employees have been written up for having an idea, a concept for efficiency or effectiveness for Bridgeport, that contrasts with Command Center? How many have been sanctioned in one way or another by acting or interim leaders? How many have hired personal legal representation to weather the treacherous rapids of City processes and keep their positions in these times of trouble? What is the City legal cost in these anti-competency vendettas and loss of time from people worrying about their status? Has it become a crime in the City for an employee to have an opinion? Or just to express it within hearing distance of a Command Center sycophant?
    It sounds very troubling for those whose career and material family well being has been at stake. It seems unfair for sure. Voters must assist in investigating and reforming this unjust environment. The Democratic primary two weeks from now is the place to initiate an end to the funny business. Time will tell.

    0
    1. donj, I have not committed to any candidate for Mayor and at this point I’m still not sure who I will vote for. I probably would have supported John Gomes had he stayed in the race. I have offered my help to some city council candidates and have also contributed to some. If you ever need any info. concerning me, I’m very approachable and would welcome your inquiries.

      0
        1. Corrupticut, if he is working as hard as you say … there must be another reason why he hasn’t called for my help. The thought if I supported John then I should support MJF just sounds like the same old, same old. Sometimes the devil you know …

          0
  12. Don’t worry about OIB friend Hector A. Diaz. Worry and keep an eye for his cousin: Wong. A long-time AB operative who works for Mario’s girlfriend and is an expert in dealing with the Seniors. A reminder to all AB operatives: My favorite dish is Latino/Hispanic AB operatives. Your method of operation is old and transparent. The AB operation in the 130, 131, 137, and 138 districts are the most corrupt and the operatives remain the same. I suggest you undo what you’ve already done and stop what you are doing. The folks you’ve fooled will implicate and incriminate you.

    0
    1. “… operatives remain the same …” Don’t be misled by the four words above. I’ll give you an example, the AB operation at 376 E. Washington Avenue has changed a little or at least the method of operation has. The old key figure from 376 E. Washington has moved the operation to the old Park City Hospital building. I’m warning you all: STOP!
      I’m not alone in this, so killing me won’t make a difference. You won’t find evidence anywhere near me as all my bases are completely covered. Make my day!

      0
      1. Joel, I heard Rosie (my cousin) was working for MJF. She had some harsh words for Mayor Finch last municipal elections when she supported Maria Valle for council. We haven’t been on speaking terms for a few years. She is most assuredly not a fan of Rose Hoyt.

        0
        1. Good to hear that, Hector. That puts us on the same boat if MJF doesn’t win. I spoke to her a little over a year ago and she mentioned ya weren’t talking. She’s a good Christian all is forgotten, get together and talk things out. That explains why Hoyt is handling the 15 ABs at the Eisenhower Center.

          0

Leave a Reply