Democratic mayoral candidate Mary-Jane Foster, denied ballot access by Democratic Registrar of Voters Santa Ayala, filed a lawsuit in Bridgeport Superior Court Wednesday afternoon asking the court to overturn Ayala. Foster and her slate of candidates rejected by Ayala are represented by First Amendment attorney Alan Neigher and attorney Michele Mount (OIB friend MCAT).
Neigher: “This was a fabricated excuse by the registrar which has no basis in the law and which she strategically waited to raise until the deadline for petitions for the primary had passed. We believe we will be vindicated in court.”
CT Post story: here.
Legal complaint here.
0
I hope for the sake of democracy which is not in existence in this corrupt State that she gets on the ballot. If she is counting on the State’s court to give her justice it will not happen. I would advise her to go to the Federal courts for denial of her civil rights and go VERY PUBLIC NATIONWIDE with this. I do wish you all the best!!!
Wasn’t Finch the first to call for Ganim’s resignation? On behalf of the people, resign Bird, and take Peckerwood with you.
Is this old news? I can’t keep up!
www .acorn-online.com/joomla15/thebridgeportnews/news/campaign-2011/101501-finch-administration-refuses-to-provide-boe-takeover-documents-requested-under-foi-foster-asks-state-to-order-finch-to-comply.html
Via Bridgeport News:
Finch administration refuses to provide BOE takeover documents requested under FOI; Foster asks state to order Finch to comply
Finch’s days are numbered if Foster wins her lawsuit. What a stupid strategy! Knock out your opponent on a technicality not on issues.
www .barnumspost.com
What do you expect? Finch has no record of accomplishment. Of course he’s going to stoop to conquer.
I haven’t read the court documents but it looks like Denise Merrill is going to sustain some damage. Alan Neigher is an excellent attorney, as is Ms. Mount. They have a strong case here. No judge in his or her right mind would rule against the plaintiffs.
Check and mate.
By the way, how is the BOE audit progressing? I think we taxpayers paid for it.
Ask Timpanelli. Also ask Timpanelli why the hell he was made responsible for the BOE audit.
Paul Ganim could never get my vote again, Ayala could never get my vote again, Denise Merrill will never get my vote again. All these players who tried to stop the rights of citizens to get votes will never get a vote from me again. Go Foster and I sure as hell will not vote by absentee I will make it my duty to vote at the polls for this primary. For all I know this registrar will throw out Foster’s ballots!!!
Bridgeport Kid and donj: It could be worse … we could still have Susan Bysiebitch as secretary of the state.
I was at the rally held by MJF at the city hall annex. It was well attended and enthusiastic. It was great to see the mix of people who attended. It was a mirror image of the city and its people. I firmly believe we will prevail in court and then in the primary elections.
Heard from a person who attended today’s question and answer session held in Black Rock this evening. This was attended by about 75 people and was a pro-MJF crowd.
The MJF supporters would more appropriately direct their anger at MJF campaign manager Jason Bartlett rather than Ms. Ayala. Mr. Bartlett’s job is to know the law. Clearly he doesn’t. In fact, yesterday he was quoted in the Post as admitting he didn’t know the law. And wait until Mr. Bartlett has to admit the MJF petition was changed from three candidates to four at his insistence!
Lennie, I enjoy reading your blog But you are way off base here. As I have previously stated, MJF has nobody to blame but herself and her campaign. She could have included her Board of Ed candidates on a separate petition, which would have completely avoided this. She didn’t. She could have (read should have) known the requirements of the law on this point. She didn’t. She could have utilized the petition Ms. Ayala prepared for her which contained only three Board of Ed candidates. Not only did she not, but she (through her incompetent campaign manager Mr. Bartlett) demanded, without knowing the law, that it be changed to include four candidates. To suggest she or anyone on her campaign staff relied on Ms. Ayala to advise her on the law is simply not true. And if it is true it is obvious incompetence. That is what her campaign advisers are for.
Lastly, even if it is true, to suggest that somehow Ms. Ayala’s actions or inactions excuse the MJF campaign from complying with the mandates of Connecticut state election law is laughable.
Excuse me, casual_observer,
The MJF campaign was in full compliance with the statutes. The petition was rejected under a statute that concerns general elections. Nowhere in the statute is the word “primary” mentioned. It’s ambiguous but judges tend to err on the side of caution. This one is going into the win column for MJF.
Kid, if that’s true then why did the MJF campaign frantically try to withdraw one of the four BOE candidates last week when they first learned of the issue and why did Jason Bartlett concede yesterday in the Post he didn’t realize the law required this? Nice try, but that argument is as weak as the rest.
Kid, actually the MJF petition was rejected as failing to comply with the provisions of Conn. Gen. Stat. Section 9-410 (c). And guess what the title of that statute is? Here’s a clue, it starts with “Primary Petition Forms …” Try again my friend.
It was the City Charter chapter 15 which only refers to general elections.
Again, you folks are wrong. Read the MJF complaint, OIB has a link to it above. It specifically refers to CGS 9-410 (by the way, MJF’s campaign is so ignorant of the statute and its provisions they repeatedly refer to it in their complaint as 9-401. Need I say more?
You’re a lawyer, I’m not. Is the intent of the law to vanquish an entire slate? If so where does the statute say you must eliminate the entire slate? My lawyer friends tell me all the time the law does not allow absurd results. Irrespective of what I think is Ayala’s disgusting, unprofessional handling of blocking Foster, good lawyers can argue any side of an issue. How would you argue the other side?
Lennie, your point is a reasonable one, but then again it is exactly the point. Ms. Ayala is not a legislator, a judge or even a lawyer. She has absolutely no business deciding whether to apply the laws or not based on whether she perceives the outcome from that application as unfair. We are a nation of laws. And all of us, including Ms. Ayala, are obligated to follow them. So the anger towards Ms. Ayala is totally misdirected. A sort of “don’t hate the player, hate the game” sort of thing.
As for the result, again, the same analysis applies. The statute invalidates petitions that do not comply with the applicable laws. It does not permit a registrar to pick and choose from a single petition which candidates are validated and which are not. And the reasons for this are obvious and sound. Many of the people who signed that petition may have done so merely because of the presence of less than all of the names on the petition. Let’s take Mr. Fardy for example. Hypothetically, I may have signed that petition because I am in support of Mr. Fardy’s candidacy. But if Mr. Fardy had not been listed on the petition I never would have signed it. Neither the registrar of voters, or any judge of sound mind, is going to speculate as to which petition signers, more importantly how many of them, would have signed that petition if there were just 3 candidates for the Board of Ed, not 4 as the laws require.
This is exactly why blame for this outcome ultimately falls squarely on the MJF campaign. Not Ms. Ayala. Not even application of the laws in question. The MJF camp chose to list all candidates on a single petition. Nothing in the laws required that. The MJF camp could have circulated separate petitions for each candidate, or at a minimum insulated MJF herself in a separate petition. But instead it chose to circulate a singular, all-encompassing petition. In fairness to the smart people running her campaign I am going to assume the reason for this was not mere laziness, but rather was strategic. The obvious strategic reasoning for doing this was to get people who may not support one or more of the candidates individually to nevertheless sign the petition anyway because it contained at least some of the candidates individual Democratic voters would support. And hence, if you intend to reap the potential benefits of use of the single petition, then it’s only logical and fair you also be required to accept the consequences of that decision, even when they are adverse.
What if the judge determines Ayala misled the Foster slate and was derelict in her duties? If there’s a hearing on this, and I assume there will be, Ayala will be filleted on the stand.
Santa Ayala is the resident expert on voting regulations and paperwork. When I ran for office I admit I did not know everything I needed to do to get on the ballot. I had to rely on Santa and her workers to get through the process.
Santa was obligated to tell the MJF campaign if their petition filings were incorrect. She did not do this, instead she led them to believe their filings were correct.
The law Ayala refers to as well as what the charter says about the number of candidates refers to the general election and not the primary.
Santa received her marching orders and became the sacrificial lamb, shame on her. She is the keeper of the flame of democracy and she failed miserably.
Santa and the Finch crew could care less about democracy and people’s rights. They only care about keeping the money tree in their back yard. Shame on all of them.
What an exciting day!!! The channel 12 news really covered the “reinstate The Foster Slate” rally at the City Hall Annex. The Foster supporters are growing daily. So energized!!! The debate was great and Finch was totally humiliated. He is so arrogant and just figures he will dance back into City Hall. I think after tonight’s poor debate, Finch is shakin’ in his boots. Foster crushed him and she was totally respectful of him. Nothing negative. Finch just couldn’t justify why he deserved another four years!!! Cannot wait to see the papers tomorrow. Jeff Kohut also did a very nice job! I like Jeff a lot. Great ideas! I’d like him to join forces with Mary-Jane Foster.
That would be a Trifecta of class in leadership! Foster, Gomes, Kohut.
What really is impressive is how much foolishness is thrown, yet it will work in the long run in favor of Ms. Foster after so many political attacks and trying to impede a full, legitimate race. I think there are many shaking in their boots, not just Finch and it’s clearly evident when they do what they have done and will continue to do to prevent someone from competing against the current persons in office.
Personally, I don’t get too involved, therefore I personally do not attack any specific candidate, but the shadiness is clearly evident and so uncalled for.
There is something else to this mess this registrar isn’t saying or hasn’t said or said already that most aren’t looking further into, but seriously, I don’t have the reasons why she said something to a specific someone … I don’t think she is as foolish as she is projecting to be … oh well, OIB … does this happen anywhere else? … ugh.
Amazed,
I happen to agree with you to some extent. I don’t believe she knew the petitions were flawed when she handed them out. She is not that bright! Saying she did–she is now doing what the machine is telling her. Any somewhat intelligent person would never admit that–they just would not. So as they did in the fall, she will be thrown under the bus if this does not work out in their favor. However, if she is brought up front and center on serious charges, will she continue to toe the party boss’ line, or will she begin to tell the truth and nothing but the truth? We will see. In the meantime, keep those prayers going for the MJF people. If she gets back on the ballot, plain and simple, she wins in a landslide! And Bridgeport will be slowly weaned from life support.
Lennie: You raise another interesting point. Maybe you are a lawyer and just not willing to tell us? If not perhaps you should be.
In any event, while the suggestion Ayala “misled” the MJF camp and was “derelict” in her duties has some superficial appeal in the court of public opinion, in my estimation it is a nonstarter in a court of law or in any legal proceeding seeking to get the MJF petition validated.
First, state elections law is state elections law. There is no statute or doctrine of law I am aware of that excuses a citizen, no less a political candidate, from compliance with state law. Period. Remember, we are talking about a petition that fails to comply with the requirements of a state statute. Ms. Ayala is merely a municipal official. Neither she nor her office are vested with the authority to excuse a political candidate(s) from complying with the requirements of state law. Can you imagine if the opposite were true? Imagine all of the political games that would take place at the municipal level across the state? Talk about chaos and political gamesmanship! The detailed and specific elections laws have been created by the state legislature precisely to prevent that kind of stuff.
Second, while the courtroom examination of Ms. Ayala may be interesting (if it ever happens–the “reliance” argument is legally insufficient and thus entirely irrelevant and thus may not even see the light of a courtroom in this case), the far more interesting examination will be of Mr. Bartlett. His job is to know the law and to ensure the petition for his candidate(s) complies with the applicable laws, however technical they may be. He is actually going to testify under oath he didn’t know the laws, didn’t bother to retain/consult with an attorney who does (or did consult with a lawyer and was given bad advice–again not Ms. Ayala’s fault), but rather merely allegedly relied on the advice of Ms. Ayala, a non-lawyer and apparently, according to you and the folks posting here, a known Finch supporter? Does this make any sense at all? Is he really going to fall on his sword like this? This testimony, if it happens, would likely be the death knell for his future in politics. He has to be dreading this.
Lastly, based on what I have seen here and in the media, I find Mr. Bartlett’s claim he “relied” on Ms. Ayala’s advice to be curious at best. From what I have seen, Ms. Ayala originally completed the petition with just 3 board of ed candidates, and then it was Mr. Bartlett who insisted Ms. Ayala re-do the petition to include 4 BOE candidates. And this somehow is Ms. Ayala’s fault? What advice did the MJF camp’s attorneys give? And who is it more likely Mr. Bartlett relied on, the “advice” of Ms. Ayala or the advice of the MJF legal team? And whose advice would it have been more reasonable for Mr. Bartlett to rely upon?
In the end, if MJF and her camp believe application of the state elections law is unfair, then their only resort is to go to the state legislature and have the law changed. Ms. Ayala can’t do that. A judge can’t do that unless the statute in question is unconstitutional, which clearly is not the case here. Only the legislature can, but at this point that is of no help to the MJF camp.