WPCNR CAMPAIGN 09. By John F. Bailey. September 10, 2009: Commissioner of the Board of Elections, Reginald LaFayette, told WPCNR today that the Board of Elections is going to appeal Judge Nicolai’s New York Supreme Court decision Tuesday ordering the Board to place Mr. Hockley’s name on the November 3 city election ballot opposing Adam Bradley.
Lafayette said Judge Nicolai’s decision in which the judge said election law has been liberalized since 1987 when the Appellate Court ruled that failure to file a Certificate of Acceptance was grounds for being denied the ballot, and that denying the right to run for office by someone who obviously wanted to run (Mr. Hockley gathered 100 pages of petitions to run for Mayor himself), in view of a technicality was not the spirit of the intention of the Certificate of Acceptance stipulation. Nicolai in explaining his decision said the Certificate of Acceptance was primarily for the purpose of declining the nomination.
Lafayette told WPCNR that candidates of established political parties are not required to file Certificates of Acceptance, because they usually accept nominations when they are nominated. He saidn only “independent” candidates are required to file Certificates of Acceptance, or candidates who are members of a party who are cross-endorsed by other parties need to file a certificate of acceptance to accept another party’s line on the ballot.
Mr. Lafayette said the appeal had not been filed yet, but expected it to be filed soon. He said the Appellate Court in Brooklyn is required to deal speedily with election matters, and he noted that there was still 7 weeks before the election.
The reason for filing the appeal, Lafayette said was that two other independent candidates , Robert Goett of Lewisboro (who filed a Certificate of Acceptance late) and John Cronin of North Castle had not filed Certificates of Acceptance and were currently off the ballot. Lafayette told WPCNR the Board was appealing to “clarify” the law in view of the Nicolai decision.
Asked if Mr. Cronin and Mr. Goett would be automatically put on the ballots in their towns as a result of Judge Nicolai’s decision, LaFayette said these decisions “are not retroactive,” they (Cronin and Goett) would have to appeal.
Hockley told long before petitions filed he had
To file Certificates of Acceptance
Lafayette told WPCNR he stood by his statement he made after Judge Nicolai’s decision Tuesday that he had told Melody Hockley that her husband had to file a Certificate of Acceptance the very day Mrs. Hockley had filed her husband’s petitions.
Mr. Hockley had called Mr. Lafayette “a bald-faced liar” when he was informed of Mr. Lafayette’s statement that he’d told Mrs. Hockley about the need to file a Certificate of Acceptance.
LaFayette was indignant about the liar remark, saying, “a lot of these things are racially motivated.” LaFayette said he was particularly sensitive to racist undercurrents because of calls for him to recuse himself when Susan Pollet was running against Kathy Davidson (a black woman) in spring 2005 for the position of Family Court Judge, because Mr. LaFayette was African-American. To read the details of this racially-charged episode go to http://www.whiteplainscnr.com/article1447.html
Mr. LaFayette introduced Tajian Jones to WPCNR who told WPCNR that when Mr. Hockley first came in to the Board of Elections she took him through the process, went over the blue Board of Elections Calendar and dates when documents were due for Independent Candidates, and she said she specifically told him about the need to file a Certificate of Acceptance, weeks before the petitions were due.
He also introduced WPCNR to Deputy Commissioner of the Board of Elections, Jeanne Palazola, who said she had offered Mr. Hockley a complete Board of Elections law book and he refused it before the petitions were due, and she also said she had told him he needed to file a Certificate of Acceptance. Palazola said the Board officials can’t tell everything, because “We don’t know what you don’t know.”
A copy of the postcard Mr. Hockley claims he did not receive (which is generated by computer and sent to all filers of petitions (numbering some 2,000 this year) telling them when they have to decline the nomination (not accept, as Judge Nicolai’s decision pointed out), was not available because Ms. Jones advised WPCNR the postcards are generated by computer. There was not a hard-copy script available. Samples of postcards returned to the Board of Elections were entered into evidence in Judge Nicolai’s hearing Tuesday.
Asked why the postcards are not sent out registered mail, LaFayette said it would be costly, and the Board of Elections would be criticized for spending money unnecessarily.
