Morgia v Jefferson County Bd. of Elections

[*1] Morgia v Jefferson County Bd. of Elections 2023 NY Slip Op 23221 Decided on July 20, 2023 Supreme Court, Jefferson County Ramseier, J. Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on July 20, 2023
Supreme Court, Jefferson County

Alex Morgia, Plaintiff,

against

Jefferson County Board of Elections and Shannon Starkweather Burke, Defendants.



Index No. EF2023-2330


Joseph T. Burns, Esq. for Petitioner

John L. Sabik, Esq. for Defendant Jefferson County Board of Elections

Shannon Starkweather Burke, pro se. William F. Ramseier, J.

Alex Morgia ("Morgia"), Petitioner-candidate has brought this proceeding by verified petition dated June 8, 2023, pursuant to Article 16 of the New York Election law to validate his independent nominating petition filed with the Jefferson County Board of Elections for the public office of Village of Sackets Harbor Mayor and directing the Jefferson County Board of Elections to place and/or certify the name of the Petitioner-candidate on the November 7, 2023, general election ballot as a candidate for Village of Sackets Harbor Mayor.

The Respondent Jefferson County Board of Elections ("Board") appearing by the Jefferson County Attorney, John Sabik, Esq., of Counsel, opposes the petition. Respondent Shannon Starkweather Burke ("Burke"), appeared on her own behalf during oral argument but did not submit any opposing papers.

BACKGROUND

The independent nominating petition of Morgia for the position of Mayor of the Village of Sackets Harbor was filed on May 24, 2023, with the Board (NYSCEF Doc No.4). On May 30, 2023, a Notice of Objections (a general objection) was filed by Burke, objecting to the Designating/Nominating Petition filed with the Board by "Taira Morgia on May 24, Seeking office/party position of Mayor for the Sackets First party for the Village of Sackets Harbor for the General Election to be held November 7, 2023" (NYSCEF Doc #6). A Specific Objection Form was thereafter filed on June 1, 2023, by the objector Burke, to the independent petition which purports to name candidate Alex Morgia, specifying that the specific objection reason was that the "Witness failed to list the number of signatures on the page" (NYSCEF Doc #7). This form was served upon Morgia the same date by overnight mail. On June 8, 2023, a hearing was held by the Board wherein they reviewed their preliminary findings of [June 1, 2023] which were:

1. Mr. Morgia filed 45 signatures on an independent nominating petition for Sackets Harbor mayor on the party of Sackets First.2. The commissioners unanimously decided to invalidate 45 of those signatures based on specific objections filed June 1 by Shannon Starkweather Burke.3. Mr. Morgia's 0 valid signatures do not meet the minimum threshold of 32 valid signatures outlined in the state election law.

Both commissioners had an opportunity to review the June 7 submission from the Law Office of Joseph T. Burns, PLLC, on Mr. Morgia's behalf and thereafter Commissioner Seymour made the motion to invalidate Morgia's petition designating him as a candidate for Sackets Harbor mayor. Commissioner LaFave second the motion. The motion passed, 2-0 (See NYSCEF Doc #9).

LAW and ARGUMENT

Election Law §6-154(1) states that, "Any petition or certificate filed with the officer or board charged with the duty of receiving it shall be presumptively valid if it is in proper form and appears to bear the requisite number of signatures, authenticated in a manner prescribed by this chapter".

Petitioner argues that the objections are insufficient as they fail to name the actual candidate for office. This is not a question of whether the name of the candidate was misspelled, as Burke named Taira Morgia, the witness who collected 5 signatures for the candidate, rather than the candidate Alex Morgia. Election Law §6-154(2) requires that when such an objection is filed, specifications of the grounds of the objections shall be filed within six days thereafter with the same officer or board and, if specifications are not timely filed, the objection shall be null and void. Petitioner further argues that the requirement under Election Law Sec. 6-154 that a proper objection be filed prior to the filing of specifications of objections was not met, and that the Board should have never considered the objections of the purported objector Burke.

At oral argument on the motion return date, the Board indicated that despite the fact that the Notice of Objections did not name a candidate seeking office as Mayor for the Sackets First party, they were able to figure out to who's petition Burke intended to object, and that given this ability the Board considered that Burke "substantially complied" with Election Law §6-154, thereby allowing the Board to proceed with considering the validity of Morgia's independent nominating petition based on the specific objections filed thereafter.

REASONING

The case law submitted by the Board to substantiate that the objection substantially complied with Election Law §6-154 is not particularly instructive, as none fit the fact pattern here. Correctly naming the candidate to which the objection is filed is a fundamental element to a Notice of Objection. It is, in fact, its only purpose. A Board of Elections should not be made to try to divine the intention of the objector and proceed based on its intuition, however accurate it may have been in this case.

The Court finds that the Notice of Objection does not substantially comply with Election Law §6-154 in as much as it does not name the candidate, and as such the Board could not consider the objections and or specifications of objections. Further, absent a valid objection, the independent nominating petition of Morgia does possess the presumption of validity that comes from Election Law § 6-154(1), and the independent nominating petition of the Petitioner-candidate should remain valid.

The Court acknowledges that Petitioner has also raised Chapter 226 of the Laws of 2022 — the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act of New York, specifically that Election Law §17-202, which states:

"In further recognition of the protections for the right to vote provided by the constitution of the state of New York, all statutes, rules and regulations, and local laws or ordinances [*2]related to the elective franchise shall be construed liberally in favor of (a) protecting the right of voters to have their ballot cast and counted; (b) ensuring that eligible voters are not impaired in registering to vote, and (c) ensuring voters of race, color, and language-minority groups have equitable access to fully participate in the electoral process in registering to vote and voting. The authority to prescribe or maintain voting or elections policies and practices cannot be so exercised as to unnecessarily deny or abridge the right to vote. Policies and practices that burden the right to vote must be narrowly tailored to promote a compelling policy justification that must be supported by substantial evidence."

Petitioner argues that, pursuant to this law, the nominating petition of Morgia should be considered valid, and that the removal of a candidate from the ballot — as occurred with the Petitioner — for an insignificant and inconsequential error and with no notice or ability to correct this error cannot be justified, that error being the failure of the witness to include in his statement the total number of witnesses included in the petition, although the number is readily ascertainable by simply observing the number of signature lines that have been completed on the same page. To hold otherwise would fail to construe "all statutes, rules and regulations, and local laws or ordinances related to the elective franchise liberally in favor of (a) protecting the right of voters to have their ballot cast and counted.

Respondent argues that the intent of Election Law §17-202 is only to protect voter rights and access, and not to protect individuals seeking political office from legal requirements meant to protect the integrity of the petition process to ensure that only individuals having the requisite number of legitimate signatures as per Election Law appear on the election ballot.

While the Court makes no ruling on the issue of whether Article 17 Title 2 of the Election Law bears on this case, it notes that protecting the right of the voter to access a ballot that gives them no choice for whom to cast their vote makes no sense if political operatives can manipulate who appears on that same ballot by filing challenges to petitions based on a simple oversight or technical error where no fraud is present or even alleged.

Therefore, the Court hereby declares valid the independent nominating petition of Alex Morgia to the public office of Village of Sackets Harbor.

Petitioner is directed to prepare and upload the appropriate Order.

July 20, 2023
Watertown, New York
ENTER
WILLIAM F. RAMSEIER
Supreme Court Justice