skip to Main Content

Patton State Hospital Facility Chief Runoff Protest Response

11/15/2018

 The Election Committee has considered the following protest questions regarding the Patton State Hospital Facility Chief 2nd Election and our responses are as follows:

 

  1. Was each protest received within the 10-day deadline as stated in Appendix D Section 4 of the election manual?

Yes. The dual protest was received on October 9, 2018.

 

  1. Did each protester individually submit a protest?

No. There is no mention in any of the AFSCME reference materials that requires protests be separate.

  

  1. What was the date for each protest submitted by protesters?

The dual protest was received on October 9, 2018.

  

  1. What are the names of each member who submitted a protest?

There is no mention in any of the AFSCME reference materials that requires names of the protestors be provided.

  

  1. In what format did each protester submit their protest e.g., email, certified letter?

The dual protest was received via fax and signed by both parties.

 

  1. Was the election committee provided with evidence by each protester e.g., postmarked envelope ?

No. The Election Committee does not require members provide proof that they did not receive their first ballot when requesting a duplicate ballot.

  

  1. Did the committee rely on hearsay or evidence to make the decision for a new election?

The Election Committee made this decision based on the AFSCME Local Union Election Manual (p. 25).

  

  1. Can the committee provide a convincing reason to the Patton constituents that a new election is required based on evidence and the election manual rules?

Due to the close nature of this race and limited amount of voters, the two protester’s votes could have changed the outcome of this election as there were only 2 votes separating the candidates. The AFSCME Local Union Election Manual, (p. 25) allows for a new election to be held if the protest could have affected the outcome of the election.

  

  1. Who is responsible for initially sending the incorrect ballots to each protester and is there a “postmarked envelope and ballot” as evidence?

The Elections Committee in conjunction with the office staff. The Election Committee does not require members to provide proof that they did not receive their first ballot when requesting a duplicate ballot.

  

  1. Who is responsible for allegedly not sending the correct ballots in a timely manner?

The Elections Committee in conjunction with the office staff mail out ballots.

  

  1. Is there a record of the date and manner of request by each protester for the correct ballot e.g. by mail, phone, email?

Prior to the last date to request a duplicate ballot, the protesters submitted via email their requests for a new ballot.

 

  1. Why was each protest with protesters names never officially posted within the 10-day deadline following the election?

There is no mention in any of the AFSCME reference materials that requires names of the protestors to be provided. In addition, The Election Committee has 30 days to respond to any given protest.

 

  1. To show transparency why was the election committee’s response to the protests never publicly posted on the website for members to review?

There is no mention in any of the AFSCME reference materials that requires protests and/or responses to protests to be publicly posted.

  

In Unity,

 

/s/: Lenaea Sanders 

Election Committee Chair

Election Committee

/s/: Cathy Sapata

/s/: Foresteen Forbes

/s/: Rene Eller

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back To Top