How to file an Elections Complaint

Submitted by lmcshane on August 31, 2009 - 9:42am.

Recently--it was determined that Zack Reed could not use the terminology "RE-ELECT" in his campaign literature.

Here is the language on a similar advisory issued in 1999 over Avon Lake campaign literature:

http://elc.ohio.gov/AdvisoryOpinion/99ELC-05.pdf

If you find similar misuse of the term "REELECT," please file a written complaint with the Ohio Elections Commission. See http://www.elc.oh.gov 

This violates section 3517.21 (B) (1) of the Ohio Revised Code.

http://www.elc.oh.gov/complaint.stm

I plan to file my official complaint today--Anthony Brancatelli is running false advertising in the September 2009 Old Brooklyn News using the term "RE-Elect," when he has never represented the residents of the Old Brooklyn neighborhoods.

Form your own opinion, but if I could, I would--ELECT Olga Sarbinowska
Olga received 30% of the vote in during her campaign for council in 2005.  She is, by no means, a candidate to dismiss in this race.  She is the dark horse we need in Cleveland City Council.

( categories: )

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Rearranging the deck chairs

Submitted by lmcshane on August 31, 2009 - 2:41pm.

  On the Titanic....Okay--I will give credit to the blackhearted, evil one for the appropriate metaphor. 

So how many signatures are required to get on the ballot for the new Cuyahoga Council rep positions?  No one seems to know.

Hearing scheduled

Submitted by lmcshane on October 10, 2009 - 8:40am.

  Just to let any one who cares to know--the Ohio Elections Commission did find a probable cause violation of Ohio Revised Code 3517.21 (B) (1) in the evidence I sent to Columbus--an ad from the Old Brooklyn News in which Anthony Brancatelli uses the campaign language "re-elect" to represent himself to residents in Old Brooklyn.
 

You would think that government would suffice to end there and the party involved would be cautioned to not use the word "re-elect" in their campaign literature.  No--for some reason this now goes to a physical hearing in Columbus.  And, then what?

Lesson learned for me?  Why bother to challenge the system.  I am supposed to spend my own time and money now to get to Columbus and hold up the same piece of paper I submitted as evidence in the first place?  This is how we exercise our rights as citizens?  Why do I have to go through with this? Where are the checks and balances? Afterall, are there any meaningful penalties for violating the Ohio Revised Code?  What happens if the Full Commission decides that there has been a violation? 

In the case of Zack Reed--the oversight provided by the Ohio Elections Commission resulted in a reprimand.  What constitutes a reprimand? 

The upshoot seems to be, as a resident, "why bother?" Afterall, the general election is on November 3rd.  

And, just wondering,why did the complaint to Zack Reed make for Plain Dealer news, when complaints on campaign literature and rulings are being made on several candidates in this redistricted council race?

Is this all just an exercise in futility by design?

I think it might be in the

Submitted by ward14resident on October 10, 2009 - 5:23pm.

I think it might be in the wording.  Like if someone was an elected councilman in any ward they can ask to be reelected as a councilman even if it is for a different ward.  Brian Cummins used the same word "reelect" in this campaign literature.  I took it to mean that he has been a councilman in the past and is asking for our votes so he can continue to be a councilman, although not in the same ward.  I quess if there is going to be consequences for using this type of language every council member that has used it would need to be reprimanded.  Personally I don't think it is worth the fight.  Just my opinion. 

It was evidently worth the fight

Submitted by lmcshane on October 10, 2009 - 5:38pm.

For those who wanted Zack Reed canned (although he still seems to be going strong) --Reed was reprimanded and publicly poo-poo'd by the PD and I believe Brian Cummins also received a reprimand decision, although it was not given the same exposure in the PD. 

So, why bother to fight this case?  On principle, Ward14.  I agree, it doesn't seem worth it, especially given the local and state political machine that daily rolls over our rights, but I will continue to use my last breath to exercise my first amendment rights.  Re-elect is a strong word and it can not be bandied about and used to create confusion, if it does not truthfully reflect a constituency--as in the case of the redistricting that occurred in Ward 15, soon to be Ward 12.

Whether you agree with me or not--you have those same rights.  Let's not let politicians take those rights away.

 

Clarification on OEC hearing

Submitted by lmcshane on October 23, 2009 - 9:25am.

  I was supoenaed to Columbus last week.  I don't know why or by whom--I am just glad that the panel found my complaint to be valid.

Why was Rick Nagin, not supoenaed?   I have no idea and at this point, I am just glad that my brief attempt to understand the electoral process is hopefully over. 

I did have to endure considerable stress and to rearrange my work schedule and spend close to $200.00 to prepare and get to the hearing.  Is this is how Americans have been conditioned to not participate in the political process? Or, is this just how the system "works" in Ohio?

BTW--I am at home right now and my posts, if anyone bothers to check them are primarily posted in the wee hours of the morning or on my days off, or RARELY at lunch and at break times (only event postings)--note that my opinions do not necessarily reflect the opinions of my employer, my spouse, my cat, my neighbors, my extended family or anyone I happen to acknowledge on the street, bus, etc.