Battle Over GOP Freeholder Race Stays in Morris

Superior Court Judge Thomas L. Weisenbeck ruled Thursday that he has the legal jurisdiction to hear arguments that Robert Lyon, father of  Republican Morris County Freeholder candidate William “Hank” Lyon, allegedly made an illegal campaign contribution to his son’s primary election campaign.

The ruling is important because it could mean that if the judge finds that such a criminal violation occurred, according to state election law, Hank Lyon’s current 6-vote lead in the GOP primary, and his nomination as the Republican freeholder candidate in November, could be voided.

The jurisdictional matter before the court centered on whether the illegal campaign contribution charge, a criminal charge, should be heard in Superior Court or before the state’s Election Law Enforcement Commission, where most such disputes are heard.

The allegation was made in a petition to contest the election. filed  by incumbent Freeholder Margaret Nordstrom of Washington Township, who lost by six votes to Hank Lyon, a first-time candidate from Montville, in tallies to date. She is seeking to have the election results overturned.

Weisenbeck ruled that while the ELEC is a common venue for such disputes, the commission does not have the authority to grant Nordstrom the remedy she is seeking—a reversal of the primary election results. He also said that many of the cases cited referred to “elected officials,” meaning the candidate has been declared the winner of the election, but in this case the dispute is over a party nomination for the fall ballot, which will determined which candidate becomes the elected official.

In addition to the claim about the campaign contribution, the petition seeking to contest the primary vote also says several Parsippany voters may have committed voter fraud. It cites alleged cases of voters filing multiple ballots, illegal signatures appearing on one or more voting forms, and signatures in the same handwriting appearing on multiple forms.

Weisenbeck’s ruling allowed the trial to begin Thursday morning with opening statements by attorney Alan Zakin, representing Nordstrom, and Sean Connelly, representing Lyon.

Thursday’s testimony was by county election officials who explained the process of gathering and securing the ballots.

Zakin said he plans Friday to call up to 11 of the voters with questionable  ballots.

Zakin, after the judge’s ruling, said Superior Court is an appropriate jurisdiction because of the necessity to determine a Republican candidate for the November general election to face Democrat Truscha Quatrone of Montville.

He said that Nordstrom could file a complaint with ELEC, but that action would not address the reason for her election contest: to determine the Republican nominee for freeholder in time for the November election.

Connelly said that he told Hank Lyon not to worry about this decision, because the outcome of the trial and the election will be  determined by settling the issues of the alleged voting irregularities.

Connelly has called Nordstrom’s effort “a fishing expedition.”

He said the ballot count and recount were performed by the officials legally authorized and qualified to do so,  and Hank Lyon was certified as the winner.

“I’m going to refer to him as the incumbent,” Connelly said.

The debate over the alleged campaign contribution violation includes a deep discussion of New Jersey election law going as far back as 1930.

Nordstrom’s petition claims that  Robert Lyon, the father of the candidate and treasurer of the “Lyons for Conservative  Freeholder” campaign, made an illegal campaign loan of $16,000—well in excess of the $2,600 limit for individuals.

The petition also says Lyon failed to file a “48-hour” report, which is required for any donations received from one source of $1,200 or more in the last 13 days of the election.

Zakin said that those 48-hour reports are important because candidates examine each other’s campaign donation reports to gauge whether any more campaign material might be sent to voters, and to give that other candidate  a chance to respond, if necessary.

The petition says Lyon’s final 11-day pre-election report to the state’s Election Law Enforcement Commission showed a balance of $636.88 from a total raised of $3,800.

Lyon’s 20-day post-election ELEC report indicates that Robert Lyon provided a $16,000 loan on May 31, for a total of $20,250 raised, the petition says. This loan puts Robert Lyon’s contribution at a total of $15,400 more than  the per-person donation limit of $2,600, it says.

Connelly argues that there is no limit to the amount of personal funds a candidate or his family may contribute or lend to the candidate's own campaign.

The judge ruled that while the Legislature made many changes to the state’s election laws, it did not remove the Superior Court from jurisdiction in all instances. ELEC has jurisdiction of cases where the contribution in question was $50,000 or more, Weisenback said. Such a contribution is not evident in this case, he said.

Further, he said, if Nordstrom took the case to the election commission, the commissions could ask if she had sought relief from the county prosecutor or state’s attorney general because the alleged campaign contribution violation is a criminal charge.

Zakin argued that the $16,000 that was credited to the Lyon campaign was tainted because the elder Lyon owns the company that generated the funds and is treasurer of the campaign, and his son is both the candidate and deputy treasurer of the campaign.

He said an examination of the check in question would determine the origin of the funds and their route to the campaign bank account.

Connelly argued that in a 2002 Hudson county election case  an appeals court said that because of the complex and interlocking nature of election law, such cases should be heard by ELEC, where commissioners have the expertise to understand the law.

Zakin said the 2002 Hudson case was centered on utility regulation, which he agreed could need the specialized expertise of utility regulators. But most candidates for elective office are common people and election law is not so complex that the filing regulations can not be  understood by them.

Connelly said that election law does not require the filing of a 48-hour report to detail  expenditures during the last 13 days of a campaign.

The judge agreed,  but said the issues was not about expenditures, but contributions made in that period.

Weisenbeck said that 48-hour rule is in place to offer transparency during elections.

He said the Superior Court jurisdiction is appropriate because it can now be examined in the light of the need to determine a Republican freeholder nominee for the November election whether a $16,000 contribution was made by Robert Lyon in violation of election law, and whether a 48-hour report was filed with ELEC.