http://blackboxvoting.com/s9/index.php?/archives/354-Judge-probable-cause-that-the-St-Paul-Better-Ballots-Campaign-broke-the-law-for-Pro-Instant-Runoff-Voting-campaign.html
Sunday, November 15. 2009 Judge: probable cause that the St Paul Better
Ballots Campaign broke the law for Pro Instant Runoff Voting
campaign<http://blackboxvoting.com/s9/index.php?/archives/354-Judge-probable-cause-that-the-St-Paul-Better-Ballots-Campaign-broke-the-law-for-Pro-Instant-Runoff-Voting-campaign.html>
*A judge ruled that there was probable cause that the St Paul Better Ballots
Campaign broke the law when sending out endorsement claims in a campaign
mailer promoting instant runoff voting.* St Paul DFL activist Chuck Repke
filed two separate complaints about the last minute mailers that likely
affected the outcome of the election. The IRV ballot measure won by only 1%.
The misleading mailer may have given the pro IRV group the 1% they needed to
barely win.
St. Paul Politics/Judge rules instant-runoff campaign should go on
trial<http://www.twincities.com/politics/ci_13734052?source=rss>Vote-no
group accuses vote-yes group of lying about endorsements
*11/08/2009 A judge ruled Friday that there is probably cause to believe an
allegation the campaign behind the successful instant-runoff voting ballot
question in St. Paul broke state laws* by claiming endorsements of President
Barack Obama, the state Democratic Party and the St. Paul League of Women
Voters.
The ruling by Administrative Law Judge Kathleen Sheehy sends the matter to a
three-judge panel, which will hear arguments similar to a trial.
(NOTE: The trial will begin 9:30 A.M.. Wednesday, October 18th, at the
Office of Administrative Heaings, 600 North Robert Street, Saint Paul - DDD)
...
Chuck Repke, a St. Paul activist who filed a complaint shortly before the
election with the state Office of Administrative Hearings, has another take.
*"This campaign won by lying about it and I think they knew it,"* he said.
Repke, the leader of the vote-no No Bad Ballots group, accused the Better
Ballot Campaign of knowingly making false statements on pre-election
mailings that claimed the endorsements of Obama, the state
Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party and the St. Paul League of Women Voters.
State law says candidate literature cannot carry endorsements of someone
without the expressed written consent of purported endorser, and Repke said
the Better Ballot group lacked such permission at least, as it applied
specifically to Tuesday's St. Paul ballot.
MN: Court documents from that Friday hearing:
St_Paul_Prob_Cause_Nov6
<http://www.ncvoter.net/downloads/St_Paul_Prob_Cause_Nov6.pdf>
St_Paul_Notice_Evidentary_Nov6
<http://www.ncvoter.net/downloads/St_Paul_Notice_Evidentary_Nov6.pdf>
<http://www.ncvoter.net/downloads/St_Paul_Notice_Evidentary_Nov6.pdf> Paul
Better Ballots can't claim an endorsement unless they have written
permission to do so, according to Minnesota state law:
211B.02 FALSE CLAIM OF SUPPORT.A person or candidate may not knowingly make,
directly or indirectly, a false claim stating or implying that a candidate
or ballot question has the support or endorsement of a major political party
or party unit or of an organization. A person or candidate may not state in
written campaign material that the candidate or ballot question has the
support or endorsement of an individual without first getting written
permission from the individual to do so
St Paul Better Ballots was specifically asked to quit claiming the
endorsement of St Paul League of Women Voters, but the pro IRV group ignored
that request.
League of Women Voters to pro-IRV: Take our name off your
lit<http://blogs.twincities.com/city_hall_scoop/2009/10/league-of-women-voters-to-pro-.html>By
City Hall Scoop on October 29, 2009
The co-presidents of the St. Paul League of Women Voters are asking
instant-runoff voting supporters to "correct" an "error in their
literature."That lit would be mailers the Better Ballot Campaign has sent
out that list the League under "endorsed by..." implying the League urges a
vote of "yes" on Tuesday's ballot question of whether St. Paul should take
up the alternate voting method
Posted by Joyce
McCloy<http://blackboxvoting.com/s9/index.php?/authors/3-Joyce-McCloy>in
Instant
Runoff
Voting<http://blackboxvoting.com/s9/index.php?/categories/18-Instant-Runoff-Voting>at
13:23<http://blackboxvoting.com/s9/index.php?/archives/354-Judge-probable-cause-that-the-St-Paul-Better-Ballots-Campaign-broke-the-law-for-Pro-Instant-Runoff-Voting-campaign.html>
Sunday, November 15. 2009 Judge: probable cause that the St Paul Better
Ballots Campaign broke the law for Pro Instant Runoff Voting
campaign<http://blackboxvoting.com/s9/index.php?/archives/354-Judge-probable-cause-that-the-St-Paul-Better-Ballots-Campaign-broke-the-law-for-Pro-Instant-Runoff-Voting-campaign.html>
*A judge ruled that there was probable cause that the St Paul Better Ballots
Campaign broke the law when sending out endorsement claims in a campaign
mailer promoting instant runoff voting.* St Paul DFL activist Chuck Repke
filed two separate complaints about the last minute mailers that likely
affected the outcome of the election. The IRV ballot measure won by only 1%.
The misleading mailer may have given the pro IRV group the 1% they needed to
barely win.
St. Paul Politics/Judge rules instant-runoff campaign should go on
trial<http://www.twincities.com/politics/ci_13734052?source=rss>Vote-no
group accuses vote-yes group of lying about endorsements
*11/08/2009 A judge ruled Friday that there is probably cause to believe an
allegation the campaign behind the successful instant-runoff voting ballot
question in St. Paul broke state laws* by claiming endorsements of President
Barack Obama, the state Democratic Party and the St. Paul League of Women
Voters.
The ruling by Administrative Law Judge Kathleen Sheehy sends the matter to a
three-judge panel, which will hear arguments similar to a trial.
(NOTE: The trial will begin 9:30 A.M.. Wednesday, October 18th, at the
Office of Administrative Heaings, 600 North Robert Street, Saint Paul - DDD)
...
Chuck Repke, a St. Paul activist who filed a complaint shortly before the
election with the state Office of Administrative Hearings, has another take.
*"This campaign won by lying about it and I think they knew it,"* he said.
Repke, the leader of the vote-no No Bad Ballots group, accused the Better
Ballot Campaign of knowingly making false statements on pre-election
mailings that claimed the endorsements of Obama, the state
Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party and the St. Paul League of Women Voters.
State law says candidate literature cannot carry endorsements of someone
without the expressed written consent of purported endorser, and Repke said
the Better Ballot group lacked such permission at least, as it applied
specifically to Tuesday's St. Paul ballot.
MN: Court documents from that Friday hearing:
St_Paul_Prob_Cause_Nov6
<http://www.ncvoter.net/downloads/St_Paul_Prob_Cause_Nov6.pdf>
St_Paul_Notice_Evidentary_Nov6
<http://www.ncvoter.net/downloads/St_Paul_Notice_Evidentary_Nov6.pdf>
<http://www.ncvoter.net/downloads/St_Paul_Notice_Evidentary_Nov6.pdf> Paul
Better Ballots can't claim an endorsement unless they have written
permission to do so, according to Minnesota state law:
211B.02 FALSE CLAIM OF SUPPORT.A person or candidate may not knowingly make,
directly or indirectly, a false claim stating or implying that a candidate
or ballot question has the support or endorsement of a major political party
or party unit or of an organization. A person or candidate may not state in
written campaign material that the candidate or ballot question has the
support or endorsement of an individual without first getting written
permission from the individual to do so
St Paul Better Ballots was specifically asked to quit claiming the
endorsement of St Paul League of Women Voters, but the pro IRV group ignored
that request.
League of Women Voters to pro-IRV: Take our name off your
lit<http://blogs.twincities.com/city_hall_scoop/2009/10/league-of-women-voters-to-pro-.html>By
City Hall Scoop on October 29, 2009
The co-presidents of the St. Paul League of Women Voters are asking
instant-runoff voting supporters to "correct" an "error in their
literature."That lit would be mailers the Better Ballot Campaign has sent
out that list the League under "endorsed by..." implying the League urges a
vote of "yes" on Tuesday's ballot question of whether St. Paul should take
up the alternate voting method
Posted by Joyce
McCloy<http://blackboxvoting.com/s9/index.php?/authors/3-Joyce-McCloy>in
Instant
Runoff
Voting<http://blackboxvoting.com/s9/index.php?/categories/18-Instant-Runoff-Voting>at
13:23<http://blackboxvoting.com/s9/index.php?/archives/354-Judge-probable-cause-that-the-St-Paul-Better-Ballots-Campaign-broke-the-law-for-Pro-Instant-Runoff-Voting-campaign.html>
