Opinion
EFC-2020-0508
04-17-2020
In the Matter of the Application of Claudia Tenney, , Petitioner-Candidate, v. Oswego County Board of Elections; MADISON COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS; ONEIDA COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS; HERKIMER COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS; CHENANGO COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS; CORTLAND COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS; BROOME COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS; TIOGA COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS; and NEW YORK STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS, Respondents-Boards of Elections, and RICHARD PURTELL and RITA SLEYS Respondents-Objectors.
Timothy J. Lambrecht, Esq., Wladis Law Firm, P.C. for Petitioner-Candidate Claudia Tenney Joseph T. Burns, Esq., for Petitioner-Candidate Claudia Tenney Richard C. Mitchell, Esq., for Respondent Oswego County Board of Elections Tina M. Wayland-Smith, Esq., for Respondent Madison County Board of Elections Robert E. Pronteau, Esq., for Respondent Oneida County Board of Elections Karen L. Howe, Esq., for Respondent Cortland County Board of Elections Robert G. Behnke, Esq., for Respondent Broome County Board of Elections Peter Dewind, Esq., for Respondent Tioga County Board of Elections James M. Ostrowski, Esq., for Respondent-Objector Richard Purtell
Timothy J. Lambrecht, Esq., Wladis Law Firm, P.C. for Petitioner-Candidate Claudia Tenney Joseph T. Burns, Esq., for Petitioner-Candidate Claudia Tenney Richard C. Mitchell, Esq., for Respondent Oswego County Board of Elections Tina M. Wayland-Smith, Esq., for Respondent Madison County Board of Elections Robert E. Pronteau, Esq., for Respondent Oneida County Board of Elections Karen L. Howe, Esq., for Respondent Cortland County Board of Elections Robert G. Behnke, Esq., for Respondent Broome County Board of Elections Peter Dewind, Esq., for Respondent Tioga County Board of Elections James M. Ostrowski, Esq., for Respondent-Objector Richard Purtell Scott J. DelConte, J.
I.
Petitioner-Candidate Claudia Tenney commenced this essential special proceeding pursuant to Election Law § 16-102 to validate her designation as a Libertarian Party candidate for the United States House of Representatives, and to direct that her name appear as a Libertarian Party candidate on all 2020 primary ballots in the 22nd Congressional District. However Tenney, who is not a registered member of the Libertarian Party, did not file the proper certificate of authorization (commonly known by political parties and candidates across the state as the Wilson-Pakula authorization) under the Rules of the Libertarian Party. Accordingly, the designating petition is invalid. Tenney's requested relief is therefore DENIED and the Verified Petition is DISMISSED, with prejudice.
II.
On March 19, 2020, Claudia Tenney, a candidate for the United States Congress, filed a Libertarian Party designating petition and, since she is not a member of the Libertarian Party, a certificate of acceptance (Election Law §§ 6-132, 6-146). That same day, the members of the Interim State Committee of the Libertarian Party met and declined to issue Tenney the required Wilson-Pakula authorization. On March 21, 2020, another party committee, identified as the "22nd Congressional District Nominating Committee of the Libertarian Party," issued Tenney a certificate purporting to authorize her as a 2020 congressional candidate. Tenney later filed the district committee's certificate with the State Board of Elections.
Four general objections were timely filed challenging Tenney's Libertarian Party designating petition, along with two sets of specifications, arguing that the designating petition is invalid because the certificate of authorization was not issued by the state committee. The record before the Court further reflects that, on March 24, 2020, Matthew McIntyre, one of the signers of the district committee's purported certificate of authorization, emailed the State Board of Elections and advised that he had been misled into signing the document, believed that it was fraudulent, and wanted to withdraw it.
On March 30, 2020, Tenney commenced this special proceeding in Oswego County Supreme Court, seeking an order declaring the validity of her designating petition, certificate of acceptance and the certificate of authorization issued by the 22nd Congressional District Nominating Committee of the Libertarian Party. This essential matter (AO/78/20) was made returnable in Oswego County's virtual courtroom on April 16, 2020 by Order to Show Cause. All respondents were duly served in accordance with that Order, and Answers were filed by Respondents Oswego, Madison, Oneida and Tioga County Boards of Election, as well as by Respondent-Objector Richard Purtell. The State Board of Elections filed required evidentiary documents, including the effective and controlling Rules of the Libertarian Party (NYSCEF Doc. Nos. 45 and 47), along with a statement of "no position."
Following service on all parties, Respondent Purtell commenced a separate special proceeding in Oneida County (Hon. B. Clark, J.S.C., Index No. EFCA2020-000885) seeking to invalidate Tenney's Libertarian Party designating petition. Justice Clark stayed the Oneida County proceeding pending the resolution of the present action.
On April 16, 2020, oral argument was held on the record, with counsel appearing in the virtual courtroom via Skype for Business or telephonically.
III.
Procedurally, Respondents Oswego, Madison and Tioga County Boards of Elections assert that this Election Law proceeding is not ripe because the statute of limitations has been tolled under Executive Order 202.8. However, this is an essential proceeding, specifically enumerated in the Administrative Order of the Chief Administrative Judge (AO/78/20[c][7]) and is, therefore, ripe for adjudication.
Respondent Purtell alleges that venue is improper and argues, without a motion, that this action should be transferred to Oneida County, where Tenney resides. Oswego County, however, is a proper venue (CPLR 506[a]) and, therefore, transfer is not warranted. Respondent Purtell also alleges that the New York State Libertarian Party and its chair are necessary parties, and that Tenney's failure to name them requires dismissal. However, neither the state party nor its chair objected to Tenney's designating petition, and Tenney is not challenging the validity of any action taken by either of them ( contra Jenkins v Board of Elections, 270 AD2d 436 [2d Dept 2000]). Accordingly, neither are necessary parties.
No other procedural issues or substantive affirmative defenses have been raised. Based on the record, this special proceeding was timely commenced, properly served, and no respondent has objected to Tenney's standing to seek the requested relief as a petitioner-candidate (see e.g. Matter of Fosella v Dinkins, 66 NY2d 162 [1985]). Jurisdiction is proper pursuant to Election Law § 16-100, and no party seeks declaratory or cross-relief exceeding that authorized under Election Law § 16-102. Accordingly, the issues raised in Tenney's validating petition relating to her Libertarian Party designation and, specifically, the Wilson-Pakula authorization, are properly before this Court.
IV.
Since Tenney is not a registered member of the Libertarian Party but, rather, seeks the party's cross-endorsement, she was required to timely file a proper Wilson-Pakula authorization (Election Law § 6-120[3]). That requirement was designed, and legislatively adopted, to "prevent the invasion or takeover of the party by outsiders" (Master v Pohanka, 10 NY3d 620, 626 [2008]). To ensure that each political party can retain control over its ballot line, and keep its cross-endorsements in check, the governing statute allows the party's state committee, if it so chooses, to vest itself with the sole and exclusive power to issue the Wilson-Pakula authorizations in its party rules (Master, 10 NY3d at 625-26; New York State Commissioner of the Independence Party v New York State Board of Elections, 87 AD3d 806, 811 [3d Dept 2011]; Peluso v Erie County Independence Party, 66 AD3d 1329, 1331 [4th Dept 2009]). Such party rules empowering, or restraining, a committee's issuance of Wilson-Pakula authorizations "must be respected by the courts and given effect" (Master, 10 NY2d at 625-26).
Here, contrary to Tenney's argument, it is clear that the state committee of the Libertarian Party chose to retain control over its ballot line in every election in New York State by vesting itself with the sole and exclusive authority to approve, and authorize, all non-party candidates. Specifically, Rule 13.2.1 ("Candidate Qualifications") which applies to Tenney and all other potential candidates, plainly states that "Libertarian Party candidates will be limited to those people who are enrolled members of the Libertarian Party except as provided in 13.2.4." Rule 13.2.4 (Non-Libertarian Candidates"), which controls the party's cross-endorsement process, provides, in turn, that:
Any nomination made by the Libertarian Party in any political subdivision in New York State whose recipient is not a member of the Libertarian Party will be subject to the approval of a majority of a quorum of the Interim State Committee and subsequent Executive Committee as provided by the Election Law.
Finally, Rule 13.2.5 ("Issuance of Wilson-Pakula Forms") adopted in February of 2020 to further clarify the exclusive role of the state committee, provides that: After the Non-Libertarian candidate has been approved by a majority of a quorum of the (interim) state committee members and the executive committee, as required by 13.2.4 of these rules, the needed Wilson-Pakula form or its legal equivalent is to be issued by the (interim) state committee.
Read together, these provisions of the party's rules are plain and unambiguous, and vest the state committee with the sole and exclusive power to issue Wilson-Pakula authorizations for the cross-endorsement of non-party candidates, such as Tenney. Tenney, while acknowledging that she did not receive a Wilson-Pakula authorization or any other approval from the state committee as required under Rules 13.2.4 and 13.2.5, argues that the 22nd Congressional District Nominating Committee of the Libertarian Party was concurrently empowered under Rule 13.1.6 to nominate and authorize her congressional candidacy. This argument is contradicted by the plain reading of the party's rules. Rule 13.1.6 is limited, and only empowers a district committee to issue certificates of nomination to fill vacancies (Election Law § 6-114) and select candidates for special elections (Election Law § 6-118); it does not empower district committees to issue Wilson-Pakula authorizations. The only provisions in the Libertarian Party's rules that empower a committee to issue Wilson-Pakula authorizations are found in Rules 13.2.4 and 13.2.5, and those rules expressly empower the state committee, and only the state committee, to issue them (see e.g. Master, 10 NY3d 602; Independence Party, 87 AD3d 806, 811; Peluso, 66 AD3d 1329).
Taking all of the provisions of Article 13 as a whole, it is apparent that Rule 13.1.6 only pertains to the nomination of registered Libertarian Party members, not to non-party candidates such as Tenney who seek the party's cross-endorsement. Under the unequivocal language of Rules 13.2.4 and 13.2.5, every candidate seeking to run on the Libertarian Party's ballot line who is not a registered member of the Libertarian Party must be approved by the state committee. Tenney did not receive that approval.
Tenney's citation to, and reliance upon, the unreported decision in Castro v Whitmer (Index No. 0267/2020, Sup Ct. March 16, 2020) in support of her argument is unavailing. In Castro, a citizen-objector challenged the nomination of a special congressional election candidate by a Libertarian Party district committee. Unlike Tenney, however, the challenged candidate was a registered member of the Libertarian Party and, therefore, did not need a Wilson-Pakula authorization. Thus the Court in Castro was not presented with the determinative issue in this action, namely, that the state committee of the Libertarian Party has the sole and exclusive power to issue Wilson-Pakula authorizations to all non-party candidates.
Accordingly, after due deliberation, thorough and effective oral argument by counsel, and considering all of the evidence, it is the determination of this Court that Petitioner-Candidate Claudia Tenney's designating petition as a Libertarian Party candidate for the United States House of Representatives, 22nd District, and her filed certificate of authorization are invalid. There being no other issues or objections raised by the parties, it is hereby,
ADJUDGED and DECLARED that Petitioner-Candidate Claudia Tenney's designating petition as a Libertarian Party candidate for the United States House of Representatives, 22nd District, and her filed certificate of authorization, are invalid; and it is further. ORDERED that the relief request in the Petition is DENIED, and the Petition is DISMISSED, with prejudice and on the merits. ENTER Dated: April 17, 2020 HON. SCOTT J. DELCONTE, J.S.C.