UPDATED: 09:20 AM
HAVE STARK GOP CHAIRMAN/EXECUTIVE DIR OF THE STARK BOE
JEFF MATTHEWS
IN CONJUNCTION WITH
REPUBLICAN OHIO SECRETARY OF STATE FRANK LaROSE'S OFFICE
CREATED NEW ELECTION LAW/POLICY?
First of all, let it be said that this blog is not about the candidate.
Nancy Halter has been and continues to be a superlative public service asset to the city of Massillon. She has been listed by The Stark County Political Report as one of the top officials in Stark County political subdivision government in terms of performance.
It appears that she will be selected on Monday by the Massillon members of the Stark County Republican Party Central Committee to replace recently deceased Milan Chovan as a Massillon councilperson-at-large through December 31, 2019 And that is A GOOD THING for Massillon. Nobody in Massillon has the credentials that Halter does in having renedered public service to the city of Massillon.
It appears that she will be selected on Monday by the Massillon members of the Stark County Republican Party Central Committee to replace recently deceased Milan Chovan as a Massillon councilperson-at-large through December 31, 2019 And that is A GOOD THING for Massillon. Nobody in Massillon has the credentials that Halter does in having renedered public service to the city of Massillon.
However, it is about the manner in which Stark County Board of Elections executive director Jeff Matthews (chairman of the Stark County Republican Party) has dealt with, in conjunction with the legal counsel for Republican Ohio secretary of state Frank LaRose, regarding the resignation/rescission of resignation letters of former Councilwoman Halter in reference to her off/on again Massillon council-at-large candidacy for the November 5, 2019 election.
Readers of the SCPR know that it is immaterial whether or this blogger personally likes or dislikes a Stark County political subdivision (county, city, township and boards of education, etc), officials in analyzing the processes of government and scrutinizing whether or not a subject official(s) is/are in compliance with the rule of law.
This blogger does not believe that Matthews and derivatively (as "the buck stops here" accountable officials, the BOE board members) are in compliance with Ohio law.
And if the SCPR's belief is unmerited, hopefully, Matthews, the secretary of state's office or (if accessed by the BOE, the Stark County prosecutor's office will come up with credible legal bases upon which Halter should be allowed on the November, 2019 ballot.
To repeat, on a qualitative basis, Halter is exactly the personification of a person who should be on the ballot among the choices that voters have in deciding who their elected officials will be.
Readers of the SCPR know that it is immaterial whether or this blogger personally likes or dislikes a Stark County political subdivision (county, city, township and boards of education, etc), officials in analyzing the processes of government and scrutinizing whether or not a subject official(s) is/are in compliance with the rule of law.
This blogger does not believe that Matthews and derivatively (as "the buck stops here" accountable officials, the BOE board members) are in compliance with Ohio law.
And if the SCPR's belief is unmerited, hopefully, Matthews, the secretary of state's office or (if accessed by the BOE, the Stark County prosecutor's office will come up with credible legal bases upon which Halter should be allowed on the November, 2019 ballot.
To repeat, on a qualitative basis, Halter is exactly the personification of a person who should be on the ballot among the choices that voters have in deciding who their elected officials will be.
On May 31th (received at the BOE on June 3rd), Nancy penned a letter to the Stark County Board of elections, to wit:
Her withdrawal left Massillon Republicans with two candidates for "council-at-large" positions in Massillon city government.
Tragically and at a great loss to the Massillon community, incumbent Republican councilman Milan Chovan passed away on June 24th.
The Chovan passing left Massillon with only one Republican councilperson-at-large candidacy; namely, incumbent Ed Lewis, IV.
It appears that Massillon/Stark County Republicans were caught flat-footed by Chovan's untimely death in the political sense of untimely.
Had Milan survived until November 5th (the date of this year's general election) and been re-elected; the Massillon Republican Party Central Committee (MRP) would by Ohio law appoint a successor to serve out his term.
But unfortunately he did not and consequently the MRP was only going to have only one candidate on the November 5th ballot which, of course, made it highly likely that Democrats were going to control council and, Massillon Regular Republicans, were going to be one, maybe, two or at the very most three in number come the 2020/2021 term of Massillon City Council.
Republican mayoral candidate James Haavisto has been pretty much read out of the Stark County/Massillon Republican party and he has encouraged maverick Republicans and independents loyal to him to run for council.
What to do? Likely was the question racing through the mind of Chairman Matthews?
At least one Haavisto Republican (Mark Lombardi, Ward 1, unopposed) and, perhaps, two (Michael Snee - Ward 6) will serve on the 2020/2021 cycle of Massillon City Council. There is also an "independent" running in Ward 2 (a seat currently held by Democrat David Irwin).
Regular Massillon Republicans had high hopes for Jim Thieret but the independent (Jack Moore, said to be put up to running by Haavisto) makes it likely that Democrat Irwin will win a second term.
That leaves only Regular Republican Mike Gregg (incumbent and unopposed, Ward 4) and fellow Regular Republican incumbent councilman-at-large Ed Lewis, IV as possible returning to council councilpersons.
Again, probably from Stark GOP chairman Jeff Matthews' perspective: "What to do?"
It appears that his answer was to convince former distinguished councilperson (twice a councilperson) Nancy Halter to reconsider her withdrawal.
On June 26th, just two days after Milan Chovan's death, Halter filed this letter with the Stark County Board of Elections.
Some Massillonians, especially the three Democrats running for council, might be saying: "WAIT A MINUTE!"
How can a person withdraw and then rescind the withdrawal?
It appears that Matthews and/or Republican BOE administrator Travis Secrest, once they received the Halter rescission, contacted Republican Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose's office with the question: Will this fly?
Answer from Travis:
July 8, 2019 2:20 p.m.
Martin,
We referred this question to the Secretary of State’s legal counsel and below is the response we received.
“Presuming the Board has not taken action in response to the withdrawal letter, we are not aware of any law or policy of the SOS that would prohibit the candidate from rescinding the request to withdraw.”
Travis
In order to get the foregoing response, this blogger had to press the matter beyond the first responsive Secrest e-mail as included hereinabove.
Here is the original SCPR e-mail to Secrest:
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2019 8:21 AM
To: Travis E. Secrest <tesecrest@starkcountyohio.gov>
Subject: Halter withdrawal/reinstatement
Travis,
As you obviously know Nancy Halter withdrew her candidacy for council-person-at-large for the Massillon City Council sometime between the 2019 primary election date and June 7th.
Now the BOE website is showing that she has been reinstated.
Please explain to the SCPR/Twitter a basis in Ohio law upon which this change was permitted?
Thank you,
Martin Olson
SCPR/Twitter
The first SCPR follow up:
From: Martin Olson [mailto:tramols@att.net]
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2019 2:53 PM
To: Travis E. Secrest <tesecrest@starkcountyohio.gov>
Subject: Re: Halter withdrawal/reinstatement
When did the BOE receive Halter's letter of withdrawal (please send me an electronic copy). When did she rescind the withdrawal (please send me an electronic copy)? What is the usual timetable for the BOE to act on candidacy withdrawals? Where there in BOE meetings between the withdrawal letter and the rescission letter? If so, what were the dates of those meetings?
To which responded by sending two attachments which were copies of Halter's resignation and subsequent attempt to rescind.
Travis E. Secrest <tesecrest@starkcountyohio.gov>
To: Martin Olson
Jul 8 at 3:01 PM
Attached are the documents you requested. The time stamp on the first letter is hard to read in the scan, it is 6/3/19.
Travis
To which, the SCPR responded thusly:
Martin Olson <tramols@att.net>
To: Travis E. Secrest
Jul 8 at 3:52 PM
Am I going to get answers to my questions?
Secrest's response:
Travis E. Secrest <tesecrest@starkcountyohio.gov>
To: Martin Olson
Jul 8 at 3:56 PM
I believe you are asking if there were any board meetings between the dates of these letters.
There were none.
The SCPR's follow up:
Martin Olson <tramols@att.net>
To: Travis E. Secrest
Jul 8 at 4:10 PM
Another question you have not answered.
"What is the usual timetable for the BOE to act on candidacy withdrawals? "
An additional question: Why would the BOE publish in its November list of candidates on about June 7th that Halter had withdrawn if the BOE "presumably" (the word used by the OH SOS legal counsel) the BOE had not acted on the request to withdraw?
As of the publication of this blog, no response to the 4:10 p.m. SCPR follow-up.
And, likely, there will not be.
For it appears to the SCPR that Director Matthews does not want to be forthcoming about how he has dealt with the Halter matter.
It is obvious to this blogger that it is going to be like "pulling teeth" to get at the "heart of the matter" as to what Matthews and or Secrest were doing to deal with the Halter try to rescind her withdrawal.
To cover all bases, the SCPR has sent this e-mail to the Ohio secretary of state office:
Three days later, NO RESPONSE!
The SCPR is beginning to think there might be a public official Matthews/Secrest"cover-up" in process and to make matters worse on a government ethics plane, Matthews might not be rightly dividing his job as Stark County Republican Party chairman and that of being executive director of the Stark County Board of Elections.
Frank LaRose and his legal counsel at the Ohio secretary of state office ought to be doing a thoroughgoing review of the exchanges between his office and Matthews/Secrest and provide a "real" legal analysis to the Stark County/Massillon public!
Though this blogger would like to see Halter on the November ballot and trust that Massillonians would be wise enough to elect her, the SCPR is skeptical of the SOS legal counsel's response is in accord with Ohio election law, to wit:
Here is the original SCPR e-mail to Secrest:
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2019 8:21 AM
To: Travis E. Secrest <tesecrest@starkcountyohio.gov>
Subject: Halter withdrawal/reinstatement
Travis,
As you obviously know Nancy Halter withdrew her candidacy for council-person-at-large for the Massillon City Council sometime between the 2019 primary election date and June 7th.
Now the BOE website is showing that she has been reinstated.
Please explain to the SCPR/Twitter a basis in Ohio law upon which this change was permitted?
Thank you,
Martin Olson
SCPR/Twitter
The first SCPR follow up:
From: Martin Olson [mailto:tramols@att.net]
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2019 2:53 PM
To: Travis E. Secrest <tesecrest@starkcountyohio.gov>
Subject: Re: Halter withdrawal/reinstatement
When did the BOE receive Halter's letter of withdrawal (please send me an electronic copy). When did she rescind the withdrawal (please send me an electronic copy)? What is the usual timetable for the BOE to act on candidacy withdrawals? Where there in BOE meetings between the withdrawal letter and the rescission letter? If so, what were the dates of those meetings?
To which responded by sending two attachments which were copies of Halter's resignation and subsequent attempt to rescind.
Travis E. Secrest <tesecrest@starkcountyohio.gov>
To: Martin Olson
Jul 8 at 3:01 PM
Attached are the documents you requested. The time stamp on the first letter is hard to read in the scan, it is 6/3/19.
Travis
To which, the SCPR responded thusly:
Martin Olson <tramols@att.net>
To: Travis E. Secrest
Jul 8 at 3:52 PM
Am I going to get answers to my questions?
Secrest's response:
Travis E. Secrest <tesecrest@starkcountyohio.gov>
To: Martin Olson
Jul 8 at 3:56 PM
I believe you are asking if there were any board meetings between the dates of these letters.
There were none.
The SCPR's follow up:
Martin Olson <tramols@att.net>
To: Travis E. Secrest
Jul 8 at 4:10 PM
Another question you have not answered.
"What is the usual timetable for the BOE to act on candidacy withdrawals? "
An additional question: Why would the BOE publish in its November list of candidates on about June 7th that Halter had withdrawn if the BOE "presumably" (the word used by the OH SOS legal counsel) the BOE had not acted on the request to withdraw?
As of the publication of this blog, no response to the 4:10 p.m. SCPR follow-up.
And, likely, there will not be.
For it appears to the SCPR that Director Matthews does not want to be forthcoming about how he has dealt with the Halter matter.
It is obvious to this blogger that it is going to be like "pulling teeth" to get at the "heart of the matter" as to what Matthews and or Secrest were doing to deal with the Halter try to rescind her withdrawal.
To cover all bases, the SCPR has sent this e-mail to the Ohio secretary of state office:
Three days later, NO RESPONSE!
The SCPR is beginning to think there might be a public official Matthews/Secrest"cover-up" in process and to make matters worse on a government ethics plane, Matthews might not be rightly dividing his job as Stark County Republican Party chairman and that of being executive director of the Stark County Board of Elections.
Frank LaRose and his legal counsel at the Ohio secretary of state office ought to be doing a thoroughgoing review of the exchanges between his office and Matthews/Secrest and provide a "real" legal analysis to the Stark County/Massillon public!
Though this blogger would like to see Halter on the November ballot and trust that Massillonians would be wise enough to elect her, the SCPR is skeptical of the SOS legal counsel's response is in accord with Ohio election law, to wit:
Take a look at Ohio Revised Code Section 3513.30:
3513.30 Death or withdrawal of candidate before a primary election.
(D) Any person nominated in a primary election or by nominating petition as a candidate for election at the next general election may withdraw as such candidate at any time prior to the general election. Such withdrawal may be effected by the filing of a written statement by such candidate announcing the candidate's withdrawal and requesting that the candidate's name not be printed on the ballots. ... .
Focus on the statutory language "[s]uch withdrawal may be EFFECTED (emphasis added) by the filing of a written statement by such candidate [Halter, in this case] ANNOUNCING (emphasis added) the candidate's withdrawal ... ."
Now take a look at the SOS legal counsel's words: "[p]resuming the Board has NOT (emphasis added) taken action in response to the withdrawal letter ... ."
In this journalist's take of ORC Section 3513.30(D) there is NO PROVISION FOR THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS TO TAKE RESPONSIVE ACTION!
The submission of the May 31st Halter letter seems to this writer to be "self-executing" under the language of 3513.30(D) and that anyone submitting such a letter to an Ohio Board of Elections should be very, very, very sure that withdrawal is what she/he wants to do.
The SCPR does not believe (reference SOS: "presuming the Board has not taken any action ... ") is a bona fide legal analysis but one designed to help the Stark County Republican Party to salvage the candidacy of Republican Nancy Halter in the November 5, 2019 general election.
To say it again, the problem is not Nancy Halter and her superlative qualities as a candidate; it appears to the SCPR to be, perhaps, the political zeal of GOP chair/BOE executive director Jeff Matthews, perhaps, unchecked by the Ohio secretary of state's office.
Undoubtedly, being the quality "the rules are the rules" person she is; had Matthews/Secrest/the Ohio secretary of state office (through Matthews and Secrest) not accepted the rescission, he would have been good with that.
And, it could be that there is a much stronger legal position than:
“Presuming the Board has not taken action in response to the withdrawal letter, we are not aware of any law or policy of the SOS that would prohibit the candidate from rescinding the request to withdraw.”
In additional e-mail exchanges with Secret, it appears that THERE IS NO FORMAL "NOT HAVING TAKEN ACTION" being implemented at the Stark County BOE and, likely, not anywhere else in Ohio in that there seems to be no authorizing legislation for the creation of such a process.
In light of the flimsiness (i.e. "presuming") the legal advice Matthews in apparently relying on, the secretary of state's office needs to take up the SCPR's request for a thoroughgoing legal analysis.
Take a look at this e-mail from legal counsel for the Ohio SOS on two questions presented by Director Matthews (through Secrest) on the Massillon situation:
(NOTE: As is to be seen in the e-mail below, Secrest contacted the SOS office via telephone on June 26th, the date Halter wrote her attempt to rescind letter. The SCPR does not believe that Halter had anything to do with what appears to The Report to be "political maneuvering" at the direction of Matthews. Rather, this blogger thinks she was doing what any citizen should do and that is relying on election law experts to provide her with a "solid" legal footing upon which to seek to rescind her withdrawal. The SCPR thinks that Matthews and the SOS did not deliver.)
Had the SOS's Hobday ruminated on ORC 3513.30(D), then one could take his opinion more seriously.
If the secretary revisits and/or the Stark County prosecutor provides a plausible legal justification for the BOE's acceptance of the Halter attempted rescission, of course, this blogger is willing "to eat crow."
The SCPR did ask Secrest whether or not the Stark BOE had engaged the Stark prosecutor's office.
So far: NO RESPONSE!
As it stands, the response should be recognized for what it seems to be. A feeble legal-esque response. No analysis of ORC 3513.30(D). Are you kidding me?!?!!!
Matthews in his public official position as executive director of the Stark County Board of Elections needs to be totally transparent on what contacts were made to the secretary of state office and the "total" substance thereof on this matter.
And if he will not provide it, then the secretary of state's office needs to.
This blog is about public office holder accountability and transparency in ensuring that candidacies are scrutinized on the basis of a thorough vetting of the law of Ohio.
To say it again, the problem is not Nancy Halter and her superlative qualities as a candidate; it appears to the SCPR to be, perhaps, the political zeal of GOP chair/BOE executive director Jeff Matthews, perhaps, unchecked by the Ohio secretary of state's office.
Undoubtedly, being the quality "the rules are the rules" person she is; had Matthews/Secrest/the Ohio secretary of state office (through Matthews and Secrest) not accepted the rescission, he would have been good with that.
And, it could be that there is a much stronger legal position than:
“Presuming the Board has not taken action in response to the withdrawal letter, we are not aware of any law or policy of the SOS that would prohibit the candidate from rescinding the request to withdraw.”
In additional e-mail exchanges with Secret, it appears that THERE IS NO FORMAL "NOT HAVING TAKEN ACTION" being implemented at the Stark County BOE and, likely, not anywhere else in Ohio in that there seems to be no authorizing legislation for the creation of such a process.
In light of the flimsiness (i.e. "presuming") the legal advice Matthews in apparently relying on, the secretary of state's office needs to take up the SCPR's request for a thoroughgoing legal analysis.
Take a look at this e-mail from legal counsel for the Ohio SOS on two questions presented by Director Matthews (through Secrest) on the Massillon situation:
(NOTE: As is to be seen in the e-mail below, Secrest contacted the SOS office via telephone on June 26th, the date Halter wrote her attempt to rescind letter. The SCPR does not believe that Halter had anything to do with what appears to The Report to be "political maneuvering" at the direction of Matthews. Rather, this blogger thinks she was doing what any citizen should do and that is relying on election law experts to provide her with a "solid" legal footing upon which to seek to rescind her withdrawal. The SCPR thinks that Matthews and the SOS did not deliver.)
Had the SOS's Hobday ruminated on ORC 3513.30(D), then one could take his opinion more seriously.
If the secretary revisits and/or the Stark County prosecutor provides a plausible legal justification for the BOE's acceptance of the Halter attempted rescission, of course, this blogger is willing "to eat crow."
The SCPR did ask Secrest whether or not the Stark BOE had engaged the Stark prosecutor's office.
So far: NO RESPONSE!
As it stands, the response should be recognized for what it seems to be. A feeble legal-esque response. No analysis of ORC 3513.30(D). Are you kidding me?!?!!!
Matthews in his public official position as executive director of the Stark County Board of Elections needs to be totally transparent on what contacts were made to the secretary of state office and the "total" substance thereof on this matter.
And if he will not provide it, then the secretary of state's office needs to.
This blog is about public office holder accountability and transparency in ensuring that candidacies are scrutinized on the basis of a thorough vetting of the law of Ohio.
No comments:
Post a Comment