Maggy files Law Suit! Hooray. Is City Hall and Board of Elections ready "MAGGY"

[Frank Bellamy, MAP Masters of Applied Politics]

Judge candidates want on ballot
BY JANICE

MASON – The controversy over three independent candidates for judge here has made its way to the Ohio Supreme Court.

The court, which is already considering whether to suspend the current judge's law license – an action that would kick incumbent George Parker off the bench – now is being asked to order the Warren County Board of Elections to place the three candidates' names on the ballot.

Voters will decide who becomes the next Mason municipal judge, a position that pays $63,850 a year, at the Nov. 6 general election.

The elections board decided last month that Mitchell W. Allen, James A. Whitaker Jr. – and Parker, who is trying to run as an independent after losing the local Republican party's endorsement – should be disqualified from the ballot.

The board cited an Ohio Secretary of State's opinion stating that candidates must be free of partisan ties to be considered legitimate independent candidates. The board concluded that the three candidates did not meet those requirements.

But in the Supreme Court action filed earlier this month, the would-be candidates assert that they met all legal requirements to seek the job. The three men allege the elections board abused its discretion and disregarded Ohio law by removing their names from voters' consideration.

The elections board has 21 days from the date of the Supreme Court request, July 20, to file a response. Then the Supreme Court will either dismiss the case or order the names placed on the ballot.

But the lawsuit requests an "expedited review," in hopes of having a decision before the Aug. 23 deadline for the elections board to finalize its listing of candidates and issues for the November ballot.

Michael E. Moore, Warren elections director, said the board believed its action was the correct one, considering the Secretary of State's opinion about independent candidates.

The battle over the ballot is the latest controversy embroiling Parker.

In June, the Ohio Supreme Court's Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline found 31 instances where Parker violated rules governing ethics and professional conduct.

The disciplinary board recommended a one-year suspension of Parker's law license. Another six months could be added if Parker failed to meet certain conditions, including continuing therapy for his narcissistic personality disorder.

Unless the Supreme Court acts more quickly, Parker could continue serving as judge until year's end, when his six-year term expires.

[Maggy]

Excuse me - " importantly "

[Maggy]

Bellamy,

More importntly, three judicial candidates from Warren County have gone directly to the Ohio Supreme Court. Attorneys fighting to get on the ballot - should prove interesting.

[Frank Bellamy, MAP Masters of Applied Politics]

Wilkerson, Esposito and O'Hara filed their nominating petitions by the May 7 deadline, but then voted in the May 8 Democratic primary. In their lawsuit, the three candidates said they did nothing wrong.

Prior to the deadline for filing candidates petitions, they said, ''No document or candidate guide issued either by the secretary of state of Ohio or the (elections board) established any restrictions upon independent candidates regarding their voting in partisan primary elections.''

In fact, Esposito said, he asked board employees if he could vote in the Democratic primary and was told he could.

By banning them from the ballot, the candidates claim the board is trying to make them to comply with requirements added after the filing deadline, ''which constitutes an abuse of discretion.''

Brunner's advisory was not released until June 4.

The lawsuit challenges the board's decision on one other point. In her advisory, Brunner says ''voting history alone'' is not enough to disqualify an independent candidate. The lawsuit states that the board failed to consider anything but the votes cast ''in a single primary.''

Terrence Dull, the candidates' attorney, said they are asking the court to speed up consideration of the case so they can be on the ballot. Absentee voting begins Oct. 2.

[Frank Bellamy, MAP Masters of Applied Politics]

In court documents filed Tuesday with the 7th District Court of Appeals, Lorenzi's attorneys, Mark A. Hanni and Thomas N. Michaels, wrote that their client did nothing improper and the elections board abused its discretion by not permitting her to run.

The board improperly removed her as a candidate after certifying her, Lorenzi's attorneys contend.

What she wants

Lorenzi is asking the court to order the elections board to put her name on the November ballot as an independent candidate for the 6th Ward seat.
Attachments:

[our2cents]

2 cents, there is always more than meets the eye, as I'm sure you know.

I figured that much.  Hope something positive comes from this.

[Maggy]

Responding to all.

Bellamy, this has nothing to do with city council but, it has everything to do with one's ability to run for such.

Jay, it is most certainly about all the candidates, even those in Trumbull, a couple of whom I had lunch with, and how it effects everyone.

2 cents, there is always more than meets the eye, as I'm sure you know.

[our2cents]

Well, hope the Secretary of State was included in the suit, or it seems it will be a losing attempt.  The Secretary of State put out the notice due to another suit.  It even included the court's decision that another independent claiming they could vote primary and still be independent was not correct and therefore they were not an independent:

"The candidate alleged defendants violated his constitutional rights by excluding him from a ballot as an
independent candidate for a congressional seat because he was affiliated with a political party. In an interim order, the
instant court upheld the trial court's decision denying the candidate injunctive relief. In the instant order, the court expounded
on that decision. Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 3513.257 did not impose a severe restriction on an independent candidate's
First and Fourteenth Amendment rights, so the statute only had to survive review for reasonableness."

The full notice is at:
http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/electionsvoter/advisories/2007/Adv2007-05.pdf

"If an independent candidate votes in a party primary election after filing as an
independent, the candidate is not actually unaffiliated, and the candidate's claim of
independence was either not made in good faith or is no longer current; and
If an independent candidate was on a political party's central or executive committee at
the time he or she filed as an independent candidate, or becomes such a committee
member at any time during his or her independent candidacy, the candidate is not
actually unaffiliated, and the candidate's claim of independence was either not made in
good faith or is no longer current."
"Finally, please note that it is well established that boards of elections may accept filed petitions
at face value. That is, because candidates file their petitions under penalty of election
falsification, a board may accept the declaration of the candidate without further inquiry.
However, if a board has personal knowledge or reason to believe that the declaration made by a
candidate is false, or a protest is filed against an independent candidate, the board may inquire
further to determine whether sufficient grounds exist to invalidate the candidate's petition and
disqualify the candidate from running as an independent."

[jay]

Would her suit also apply to the other city council candidates who were prevented from running as independents?

[Frank Bellamy, MAP Masters of Applied Politics]

Maggy files Law Suit!! Hooray....is City Hall and the Board of Elections ready for the force of "Maggy"??

You can bet that this Maggy Lorenzi law suit is very strong and supported with verifiable facts from its beginning to end.  

The Corrupt City Politicians and land grabbing elected officials should take some old football advice and Buckle-Up your Chin Straps on your Helmets and put your Mouth Piece in securely.  

Get ready for "Smash Mouth Politics"!

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Former candidate sues to get on the ballot
by David Skolnick
July 24, 2007 4:54 pm

YOUNGSTOWN — An independent candidate decertified by the Mahoning County Board of Elections because she voted in the recent Democratic primary filed a court complaint against the body and its four members to get on the November ballot.

Maggy Lorenzi of East Midlothian Boulevard had filed as an independent candidate for Youngstown City Council's 6th Ward seat on May 7. She then voted in the Democratic primary a day later.

The Ohio Secretary of State's Office issued a June 4 advisory to county boards of elections stating candidates can no longer be considered independents if they vote in a partisan election after filing to run for office as an independent.