Friday, March 15, 2013

Waldron's Nomination Petitions Defective

Adam Waldron, a newcomer to politics, has made what seems to be a a fatal error in his quest for a seat on Bethlehem City Council. His nomination petitions include plenty of good signatures from his supporters. But he failed to include a circulator's affidavit from a person who witnessed the signatures, which is required under the Election Code.

Nominating petitions with technical defects in the affidavit can be amended with the court's permission. But the complete absence of circulator affidavits will likely end Waldron's campaign before it begins if any of the other candidates file objections. I understand that might happen.

12 comments:

c said...

That's a shame.

Anonymous said...

What if he circulated the petitions himself?

Anonymous said...

Candidates who challenge petitions will not get my vote. Which candidate will challenge this guys petitions?

Anonymous said...

Wouldn't that say a lot about the other candidates if they challenge him .... They would nit pick ever issue instead of moving forward and resolving BIGGER issues.

Anonymous said...

wow, he can't even get the petitions done right.

Bernie O'Hare said...

I suspect Adam did circulate the petitions himself, and thought his affidavit as candidate was all he needed. I agree this is unfortunate. The Election Code should be construed liberally to protect the right to vote, but I don't think ignoring it completely can be tolerated. The complete absence of a circulator affidavit is not a mere technicality, but is instead a complete disregard for the Election Code, which is designed to prevent fraud.

Anonymous said...

He looks too much like Geeting anyway.

Seriously, I do feel bad for the kid, and his background would be an interesting one to have as a Council member. But rules are rules.

Hope he runs again.

Anonymous said...

You post as if his removal is definite. Someone still needs to challenge it.

Bernie O'Hare said...

Someone needs to challenge, and by Tuesday. His removal is by no means definite. He could win a ballot challenge. But his petition is defective. Is it fatal? I think so, but that's a judge's call.

ALFONSO TODD said...

B.O.,

Scary stuff. I was, literally, told by 3 different people during different occasions about things that were needed for the petitions. They spoke about places that needed to be signed, lines that needed to be filled, locations that needed to be notarized; and even on the DAY of the event, the kind lady in the Government Center pointed out a missing location that needed to be entered on all of the petitions. When it comes to politics, you really DO depend on the kindness of others... especially when it comes to INFORMATION (which is priceless). Good luck, everyone!

Alfonso Todd

www.votealfonsotodd.com

Anonymous said...

This is a tough one. On one hand I do not want him off the ballot. The voters should decide. On the other hand, why have the rule if it isn't enforced? How could he not have done this right when everyone else did? Big mess up!

Bernie O'Hare said...

It is unfortunate. No challenge has been filed at this point. I looked over the petitions on Friday, and they were full of well-respected names. I agree completely that "voters should decide elections, not judges," as Att'y Orloski likes to say. But this appears to be substantive. If it were a missing date, or a voter who signs with a nickname, I am sure a judge would allow the technical defect to be cured. A complete absence of an acknowledgement by a circulator, however, is clearly in violation of the Election Code.