Arm chair quarterbacks are weighing in all over Hernando County on the "Rocco vs. Robinson" fight for the county commission seat in district 2. Was Rose eligible on November 7th, or is Nancy nitpicking an issue because she is a sore loser?
Sterling Ivey, spokesman for the Florida Department of State said Florida case law clearly states that Mrs. Rocco should have established residency requirements on November 7th, the day of the election. Mr. Ivey said there appears to be no wiggle room according to his statements in this morning's edition of the Hernando Today.
Who will really win this battle? It certainly will not be the voters in Hernando County. If Nancy Robinson is success in her civil suit, she would resume her duties as commissioner. If Rose Rocco is success in defending this challenge, she will be the commissioner for the next four years. Clouds of doubt will hover over this county because the voters will question either winner of this challenge. If Mrs. Robinson is successful with her civil litigation, she will carry the reputation of a loser that does not deserve the seat. If Mrs. Rocco is sworn in as commissioner, she will bear the stigma of cheater for not abiding by residency requirements.
The Hernando County canvassing board, made up of Annie Williams, Commissioner Kingsley and Judge Scaglione, has a tough job on Friday. Will Ms. Williams and Mr. Kingsley leave their partisanship at the door when deciding whether to certify this election? If Mrs. Rocco is certified the winner on Friday, which judge will hear the civil litigation? Will it Judge Springstead, or Judge Merritt, or maybe Judge Rushing? Remember the partisan cartoons in the Hernando Today that depicted Mrs. Rocco in a unfavorable light drawn by Timothy Rushing, son of Judge and Mia Rushing.
Two new players to this debate popped up this morning attempting to influence the outcome of this election. Ana Trinque, chairwoman of the HCREC and Jay Rowden, chairman of the HCDEC are now weighing in with their partisan positions. Will the HCREC file an injunction to halt the swearing in ceremony of Mrs. Rocco next Tuesday? If so, will Mr. Rowden ask the HCDEC to take legal action? Or should Ms. Trinque and Mr. Rowden be involved at all? Is this a legal question that should be determined strictly by the merit of the law while leaving partisan politics out ot the equation?
Question, questions, questions...
Questions will remain for the next four years in the district 2 county commission seat. This debacle is a recipe for further voter apathy because we, the voters, are the real losers in this battle...
9 comments:
There are a lot of people making a lot of assumptions about this situation when, not unlike Bush v. Gore, there are laws that are going to affect what happens. For example, the canvassing board's duties are ministerial only. Many people have the idea that this board can do something about the residency issue...not true...all the canvassing board does is certify the vote count. The board has no legal authority to take evidence. Injunction? According to the law, only the Elections Commission or other state enforcing agency can seek an injunction in this situation.
No wiggle room? That is clearly not a quote from a lawyer...Mr. Mason's views in this morning's Times are a much more accurate forecast of the arguments to be made. The only relevant legal provision is not in fact a "law" but is part of the Constitution..."One commissioner residing in each district shall be elected as provided by law." There is no controlling case on what "elected" means...in fact the Division of Elections has stated in a formal opinion based on an old Jim Fair Supreme Court case that a candidate's qualifications to serve are determined when the candidate assumes office. So despite what you may be hearing or reading...
the canvassing board can only count the votes, they can't decide qualifications;
injunctions must come from a state agency;
a judge will have to decide what "elected" means, and since there are two private lawyers involved for the parties, there is by definition "wiggle room."
Thank you for your comments. When all is said and done, "the court of public opinion" will continue to express their thoughts on this debacle for quite some time...
Didn't you sue over election results once???
Yes, I did, thank you for asking. It was the first year the SOE's office used the Accu-vote scantron equipment in our county and over 10% of the ballots were counted as blank in my race during the 2000 primary election. In fact, 5 people (locally) filed complaints that year just before the historic presidential recount of Bush/Gore. The Accu-vote equipment used locally was featured in a documentary on HBO 3 weeks ago in the program, "Democracy Hacked".
Too bad for you no local Judges involved. Huh? No locals for you to insult. Oh my. Isn't that what you live for?
Actually it is probably a good thing that no local judges are involved with this suit...no conflict of interest or the mere appearance of impropriety.
You need to have less venom for the Judge and his family. You are completely out of control. No wonder you came in almost last in the 04 political race. Who would vote for someone with so much anger and professes to be positive.
Frankly, I stood solidly behind this judge aka family man until the venom laced cartoons popped up in the H. Today. In fact, I sent letters to the governor & judicial review committee requesting his appointment. In hindsight, I would not do that again for this individual. No responsibile parent of a minor child would think of putting their 15 year old "cartoonist" son in the position that they have except that it appears politics is more important to them than family values.
Are you sore at the Judge's family because his child is more intelligent than what you gave birth too?
Post a Comment