Last week, the Brown County Election Board voted to remove four candidates from this spring’s primary election ballot due to challenges about their primary voting records and another for not filing a form by deadline.
The board will meet again to review another challenge this week on Feb. 22 and will reconsider one of the challenges that was upheld last week due to new information that was shared with members after the meeting last week.
At the Feb. 15 election board meeting, members reviewed six challenges. Five of the challenges were filed by Brown County Republican Party Chairman Mark Bowman against candidates running to serve as delegates at the Republican Party state convention.
Bowman said that the five candidates — Charles Seward, Anita Martin, Keith Martin, Ryan Slack and Elizabeth Henry — did not meet the voting history requirements set by the Indiana Republican State Committee.
The election board is then tasked with deciding whether or not to uphold the challenges. The board is made up of a Republican and Democrat representative along with the county clerk.
According to the state committee’s Rule 1-24, a “qualified primary Republican” is a voter who cast a Republican Party ballot in the two most recent primary elections in Indiana that the voter had voted in. For example, if a voter cast a Republican ballot in 2016 and a Democrat ballot in 2014 they would not qualify to run as a Republican under the rule.
The candidate must also be a “Republican in good standing,” meaning they support Republican nominees and has not supported another candidate against a Republican nominee, according to the rules that were updated last September.
Rule 7-8 also states that a person is eligible to run for the state convention delegate office if they are a resident in the county and is a “qualified primary Republican.”
If a person has not previously voted in a primary election in Indiana they would need to have an authorization form signed by the county chairman and the candidate stating they pledge “full support to the Republican Party and the candidates of the Republican Party” attached to their declaration to run. None of the five challenged Republicans had filed that form with their application to run.
The five challenges were due to either a candidate voting only once in an Indiana primary as a Republican or voting in two primary elections, but once as a Republican and the other as a Democrat.
Henry sent an email to Clerk Kathy Smith before the Feb. 15 meeting informing her she wanted her name withdrawn from the ballot. Henry had voted in one primary election in 2008 as a Democrat, according to her voting record.
During the review of Slack’s challenge, Smith argued that the rule a candidate had to have voted twice as a Republican in primary elections did not apply to state delegates since they are a “political office, not an elected office.”
Slack voted in the 2016 primary election and pulled a Republican ballot, but he did not vote in another primary, according to his voting record. He attended the meeting on Feb. 15.
Based on the voting record and Rule 1-24, Election Board Chair Mark Williams motioned for the challenge to be upheld.
Member Kevin Fleming also voted in favor of upholding the challenge with Smith voting against it.
The challenges against Keith Martin, Anita Martin and Seward were also upheld due to their voting records.
Before the review of challenges, Smith informed the board she found paperwork for another challenge against Pearletta Banks who filed to run as a Republican against Smith this primary election for the office of clerk.
Smith said she missed the paperwork on her desk and found it before the Feb. 15 meeting when she was gathering her files. The board then decided to have another meeting this week to review the challenge. The challenge was made by Larry Voris regarding forms Banks had filed to run.
Bowman questioned the timing of Smith finding the challenge paperwork for her appointment since his challenges were filed the same day.
“I sat in the clerk’s office. We went through all of these (challenges) in some detail. The clerk went through all of them with Mr. Fleming before I arrived. Mr. Fleming’s signature did not appear on it (Banks challenge) either. The clerk had obviously forgotten about it for both Mr. Fleming and for me,” Williams said.
“There is also fundamental question as to whether or not the challenge has merit. We will deal with all of that on Feb. 22.”
Williams said he wants the employee in the clerk’s office who received the Banks challenge paperwork to appear at the meeting this week and that he would look into any conflict of interests with Smith voting on this challenge since Banks is her opponent this primary election.
Reconsidering another
Last week, the election board vote 2-1 to remove one of the few Democrats running for local office after Smith challenged his candidacy for not turning in a required form on time.
Gregory May is running to represent Brown County Council District 3. He is one of two Democrats running for a spot on the council and one of three who are running for an office locally outside of the state delegate and precinct committeeman offices.
At the meeting last week, Smith said she had never received the CFA 1 form from May after leaving multiple messages telling him she needed it by Feb. 11 at noon. The form lists the campaign treasurer and the candidate’s committee information. It is required when running for office with a salary that is $5,000 or more, Williams said.
Evan Knox, vice chair of the Brown County Democratic Party, attended the meeting to speak on behalf of May who could not make it to the afternoon meeting due to his work schedule. She shared with the board messages from May stating that he had turned in the CFA 1 form along with other required paperwork before the deadline, but that the CFA 1 was returned to him with highlighted areas he needed to correct and he was under the impression he had until Feb. 14 to turn the corrected one in.
May then had a family member take the form to the clerk’s office on Feb. 14 before noon.
During the meeting, Fleming questioned how well other candidates had filled their forms out who were not challenged and noted that May had turned in the other required paperwork on time.
“This one is different for me because it’s not who should get to go to the party’s convention. To me that is a different world than deciding who cannot run for local office,” he said.
“I don’t think we have all of the answers and I would suggest we consider not ruling on this one (today).”
Fleming said the board should also consider the winter storm that hit Brown County earlier this month, causing the clerk’s office to close and push election deadlines back.
Williams seconded a motion made by Smith to uphold the challenge, citing that the form was not turned in by the Feb. 11 deadline.
“We’re on a hard deadline here,” he said.
Fleming voted against upholding the challenge.
The evening of Feb. 15, May sent an email sharing his version of events surrounding the challenge to Fleming and Williams. He said he first visited the clerk’s office on Feb. 2 to submit his declaration of candidacy and statement of economic interests, but that they were not accepted because they were not notarized.
On the morning of Feb. 7, May submitted his forms again. Smith then left a message saying her office also needed a CFA 1 form “within a week of today.” That would have put the deadline at Feb. 14 and the board mentioned throughout the meeting the official state deadline was noon on Feb. 11.
Before noon on Feb. 11, May had a relative go to the clerk’s office to turn in the CFA 1 form, but it was not accepted because because three boxes and one section were blank. May had checked the box designating himself as treasurer of his campaign and signed as the campaign chairperson on the form, he noted in his email.
That afternoon, Smith left May another voicemail saying his candidacy would be challenged because he had not submitted the form on time, according to his email. He noted that was the first message he received saying the deadline was Feb. 11 at noon. The relative then returned to the clerk’s office on Feb. 14 to turn in the CFA 1. May said he first learned his form was not accepted following the Feb. 15 election board meeting.
May asked Fleming and Williams where the form went that was submitted on Feb. 14 and asked if the clerk’s office employee who took this paperwork could provide their account of what happened.
He also noted he received notice that his challenge would be reviewed at the Feb. 15 election board meeting just before 4:30 p.m. on Friday, Feb. 11.
“I am not sure how less than two business day notice is appropriate for a mid-day hearing when most people would be working,” he wrote.
Both Williams and Fleming responded to May. Williams noted the information shared was “new to the board” and not previously considered.
Williams responded that he overlooked a statute in Indiana Code that states the CFA 1 form is due noon seven days after the final date candidates could file.
The clerk’s office was closed on the deadline for candidates to file Feb. 4 due to the winter storm and was extended to Feb. 7. Because of this, Williams said the deadline for the CFA form would be Feb. 14 at noon.
“Your narrative puts the final filing event within the window,” Williams said.
“I personally apologize for missing this fact, which is an element to your claim.”
Williams said he plans to motion to have the board reconsider May’s challenge on Feb. 22. He also requested security footage of the clerk’s office be pulled of the dates and times noted in May’s email.
Fleming told May he would support a motion to reconsider the challenge or would offer a motion to do so himself on Feb. 22.
