Yesterday, in an already anticipated move, Town Attorney Ruth Weil declared COG's recall affidavit invalid because it did not clearly inform possible signers that that they were "signing under the penalties of perjury", which is required for a legal affidavit. Citing multiple case laws, including a 1975 Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court and a 1994 Superior Court ruling. Both clearly articulate the fact that this language is a REQUIREMENT of affidavits and how a Town Clerk handles them (whether or not she lets the process continue) does not supersede any state law or court rulings.
As the Barnstable Patriot pointed out, the recall attempt in Barnstable not involving Joakim ended up dying for the same reason. The 2003 attempt to recall Councilor Carl Riedell failed for very similar language issues.
It looks like this one is crystal clear. No amount of COG whining, moaning, groaning, yelling or screaming is going to change matters. Nor will any amount of phone calls or emails to the State Attorney General, Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts or Radio Hall of Fame Talk Show Host Howie Carr will result in any change. There is clear legal precedent in this matter, and the lawyer they hired to review this petition (and approved it) should be fired. This one is all on COG.
Though on this one, they might just go out and start over again. After they whine a bit first.
Of course, Weil's ruling and the anticipation of the expected ruling brought out more of the worst of COG. Over on the COG Living blog, they're talking about getting guns and "bankrolling" the next attempt to the tune of $2,000. The worst is coming from the main COG blog. There has been ethnic slurs (A "Femme Nazi" quote from Lopez even made it into the Barnstable Patriot's article), countless shameless attacks of all types on both the Town Attorney and Town Clerk, as well as the "piece de resistance" - a very large photo of someone giving the middle finger. Real family reading!
Now that people will be told that they are signing any recall paperwork under "the penalties of perjury", I wonder how many will actually sign it. This is not a simple sign-and-make-the-annoying-person-go-away petition anymore.
To those who complain that this ruling somehow "overturned the will of the voters": 255 signatures from a tiny precinct in Barnstable do not overrule the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. Ruth Weil and the Town Clerk were simply doing their jobs in ensuring that all legal issues were covered. They could tell everyone that the petition was illegal now or a nice judge could. I'm glad they saved us the trouble.
Anyway, our friends down at the Barnstable Patriot did an excellent job of summarizing the Weil decision, so here's the link to the complete story and here's a shortened version below:
Joakim recall ends on invalid affidavit (updated)
Written by David Still II
August 05, 2008
The affidavit submitted to initiate the recall of Barnstable town council president was flawed, according to the town attorney’s office, and the recall election cannot proceed.That is the essence of the Aug. 5 opinion from town attorney Ruth Weil in response to a request from Town Clerk Linda Hutchenrider. Hutchenrider did find that the petition submitted to recall Precinct 6 councilor Janet Joakim contained more than the necessary 255 “good signatures,” but asked for an opinion from the town attorney’s office regarding the entirety of the submission.
The defect in the affidavit is that it was not signed under the penalties of perjury, which Weil argues is a condition for a valid affidavit. In support of her opinion, Weil cited several Massachusetts cases, including a 1994 Massachusetts Superior Court case in which despite a town clerk’s issuance of recall petitions based on an improper affidavit, the recall was defective....
Weil's opinion is similar to one offered by her predecessor in 2003 during the attempted recall of then-Precinct 5 councilor Carl Riedell. The affidavits submitted to begin that process were deemed defective for the same reason after the collection of what appeared to be sufficient signatures....
Writing on his blog..., recall organizer Gary Lopez indicated that a new recall effort would commence.
“We will eschew a court challenge and begin the recall process anew on August 12th,” he wrote.
12 comments:
In my studious perusing of the Cape Blog scene, I have a note to pass along to readers regarding Gary Lopez's "Femme Nazi" quote.
Apparently, while Lopez typed "Femme Nazi", he was actually attempting to spell the much more common term "feminazi".
"Feminazi" is a term coined by #1 Rated Talk Show Host Rush Limbaugh. A "feminazi" is a radical feminist, highly intolerant of opposing views, especially regarding abortion and other high profile feminist issues.
Lopez's inability to spell "Feminazi" has led to much confusion regarding his intent. "Femme Nazi" has a whole other connotation, especially in light of the accusations made by fellow COGer Eric Schwaab that slurs containing the term "Nazi" were made against him around last November's election. Consdering the complaints COGers made about those accusations, it would have made sense for COGers to stay away from the term.
It appears that Lopez's use of the term, ESPECIALLY since it made it to the Barnstable Patriot, has created a bit of a "squabble" between Lopez and Schwaab.
In an email revealed on Schwaab's blog, Lopez defends his choice of words, but agrees to stop using the term. Instead, he suggests "Butch Bitch".
At least "Feminazi" has a legitimate definition (when spelled correctly). His new suggestion goes to show that the purpose of COG is not to present political views, but to attack people for no reason.
On a brighter note, I would like to thank readers for making July 2008 the second biggest month in Precinct 3 Truth viewership.
I will repeat AGAIN for people to understand, but this blog is not the place to discuss the neighborhood spat in Marstons Mills. Any comments regarding the multiple issues between neighbors will not be tolerated here. Both sides need to take their comments on the matter elsewhere. I will keep removing comments on the topic.
I think the "spat" might be part of the reason Lopez has gained so much support for the recall movement.
Not to get into the details, but I too have been perusing the Barnstable blog scene, and it seems that Joakim made a huge mistake by getting involved in a matter that was outside of her precinct and was not hostile at the time of her interference.
It seems that Joakim's intention was to destroy the reputation of a COG supported candidate by whom she felt threatened.
This was really a foolish move for Joakim politically, and attracted that Mary Clements woman who made scenes about it at council meetings as well as several other problems for Joakim.
While I respect your decision not to entertain the subject of that neighbor matter, I believe Joakim's interference aggravated the situation not only for that neighborhood, but most significantly for her own political career.
No other politician or even any other blogger, yourself included, would touch that mess, and rightfully so. You really need to ask yourself why Joakim did such a foolish thing, and Joakim needs to ask herself if it was worth it.
To the Commenter @ 7:09PM:
The incidents that have made up the "spat" are not the reason I choose not to discuss it on my site. There are two reasons:
1. While I certainly am willing to discuss national and state politics, the purpose of this blog is to discuss issues facing the Town of Barnstable and politics as they relate to Precinct 3. This "spat" falls under neither category.
2. More importantly, this issue has been aired on other blogs in this town and subsequently kicked off because, for whatever reason, it brings out the worst from supporters on BOTH sides. Some comments I have deleted from this site are enough to make a normal person sick to their stomachs because of the absolute hatred contained in them.
Other sites have shared in my experience with this dispute and have rid themselves of it, including Joakim.
I do not blame her for how things got out of hand. I think that she genuinely believed one person's side of the facts and felt that it deserved to be heard, especially when the other party was running for elected office. She had no idea the kind of deep hatred the two sides' supporters have for each other.
Personally, I think Joakim tried to do what she thought was the right thing to do and ended up making an enemy who is tireless and persistent. The recall against Joakim is more than an "uprising" of citizens in her precinct, because no one did this on their own. This is more than a disagreement with Joakim's personal politics, it is personal.
That's when politics crosses the line - when it's no longer about issues and it is all about "removing someone from office".
"Removing someone from office" isn't what solves problems, getting the right people elected into office is. The only way that can happen is if people actually start sacrificing 10 minutes a year to vote and 15 minutes (or hopefully more) to find out about the candidates. George Washington would have been ashamed if someone had voted for him because he won out in "Eeny, meeny, miny, moe" in the voting booth or because he was "cute". Voting doesn't take much, please take the time.
Joakim was asked to sit down with the parties she attacked on her blog by a highly respected fellow councilor who vouched for the character of the candidate and her family. Joakim was told of the harm that had been done to an innocent child, and that publishing libelous accounts of matters dismissed in the courts would only cause more damage to people who were beginning to heal.
Joakim refused to "communicate" with the individuals who tried to stop the blogging mess from getting out of hand the minute it started. There are piles of documents to prove it, and they will likely be published once the recall election is scheduled.
While initiators do not deny having personal contempt towards Janet Joakim for her abusive blogging and vindictive actions, it is Joakim's vindictive actions against the members of the zoning board of appeals that is the main reason the recall has widespread support.
Of all the individuals specifically named by zoning board members for attempting to manipulate the board's independence and the outrageous appointments that followed, Joakim holds the highest elected office, and is the obvious choice to take the fall.
Someone has to stand up and say it is NOT OKAY to interfere with decisions of our independent boards and committees.
The recall would be dead in the water if this ZBA mess was not such a slap in the face to the intelligence of Barnstable voters.
Joakim's attempt to dismiss the matter as one of poor communication just made her look even more guilty, and people are sick and tired of all the trouble she has caused for the town. Her recall is inevitable, and will hopefully send a strong message to town hall that voters are finally waking up and taking a good look at what's going on.
Readership of the Barnstable Patriot and local blogs is on the rise. Voter participation will be too. It is time for our town leaders to remember who pays the bills!
Personally, I think the above two comments are out of line also, they are once again referring to the "spat" in question. Trying to tie Joakim to it is rediculous and those comments should be deleted as well.
I think that spat has a lot to do with the motivation of those gathering signatures for the recall. Lopez is reporting that the third affidavit has already been circulated and is about to be submitted to the town clerk. Looks like Larry, Curley, and Moe might have finally figured out how to do it right this time.
The ZBA resignations gave the initiators a huge opportunity to strike, and it is really a shame that Janet was unable to communicate better with that charter candidate or any of the zoning board members who resigned.
I think Janet has done some good work in her years of service to the town, but I'm afraid that the ZBA resignations are just too disastrous for her to overcome politically. Former members are now specifically naming her as being primarily responsible for their walk out, and fellow councilors like Hank Farnham are doing their best to help the recall organizers from behind the scenes.
I admire Janet for standing up to these people, but it looks like she is fighting an uphill battle now.
Janet Joakim had nothing to do with the "spat" in the Marstons Mills neighborhood. Charges were filed by the BPD last year and again just a short time ago against Ms. Thoman and Mr. Wilcox. These are separate charges. In both cases the BPD filed on behalf of the other party involved due to continual criminal harassment and assaults. Ms. Joakim is NOT the problem in this case. I would think that based on the fact that the BPD have filed charges against Ms. Thoman and Mr. Wilcox for the SECOND time on behalf of the other party involved, would tell any interested party what they need to know. I agree. There is a place for this issue and it appears that it will be the Barnstable County Court House This Fall. Not this blog.
Post a Comment