Freeholder: Challenger Got Illegal Campaign Cash

Freeholder Margaret Nordstrom, trailing the contested June 7 Republican primary by six votes in counts so far, claimed Friday that her opponent received an illegal campaign loan—and that there are 41 ballot irregularities that could swing the election her way.

Nordstrom made those claims in a revised petition for a contest of that election. The petition alleges that Robert Lyon—the father of Nordstrom's opponent, William “Hank” Lyon, 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.

New Jersey election law counts individual loans as individual contributions, the petition said. The remedy under state law for such a contribution is that the nomination of that candidate be voided, Nordstrom said.

Nordstrom of Washington Township is a 12-year incumbent. Lyon is a first-time candidate. After a June 15 recount of the Republican primary's ballots, Lyon of Montville remained six votes ahead for the party’s nomination, 12,270 votes to 12,264. The winner of the primary will face Truscha Quatrone in the general election; Quatrone had been uncontested in her party's primary.

The revised petition was filed on Friday, the deadline set by Superior County Judge Thomas L. Weisenbeck. Lyon’s response is due in court Aug. 8, unless the judge allows an extension.

Lyon on Friday refuted the charges. He said he and his attorney have not examined the petition in detail together, but denied that his father made an illegal campaign contribution or that he had anything to do with the alleged  illegal voting.

He also questioned the notion that 42 votes, as he counted them, “would all turn in their favor.”

Nordstrom alleges there are some cases of voters filing multiple ballots, there are illegal signatures appearing on one or more voting forms, some signatures in the same handwriting appear on multiple forms, there's an instance of an unregistered voter, and some ballots include votes for both Lyon and Nordstrom. Two voters also claimed they were denied the right to vote because of circumstances beyond their control, Nordstrom's petition says. In one case a voting machine did not record two votes, and in the other, the location of the polling place given to voters was incorrect, the petition says.

All the voter irregularities, except two claims of voters being denied their rights, occurred in Parsippany, the petition says.

Lyon said that he did a lot of door-to-door campaigning in Parsippany, and he was received warmly. He said he was offended by the insinuation that a community in Parsippany would be particularly prone to voter fraud.

“It seems far fetched that 10 percent of one community would be engaged in fraud,” he said. “Fraud is a very strong word. I am confident. This is a fishing expedition.”

The petition said that Dale Kramer, chief deputy of the superintendent of elections, indicated in a letter that seven voters may have cast illegal ballots, including four Republicans.

These “actions evidence a fraudulent and illegal attempt to influence the election,” and the votes should be discarded, Nordstrom's petition says.

Regarding the allegation of an illegal campaign contribution, 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 indicated that Robert Lyon provided an illegal $16,000 loan on May 31, for a total of $20,250 raised, the petition alleges. This loan would put Robert Lyon’s contribution at a total of $15,400 more than the per-person donation limit of $2,600, it alleges.

The petition states the $15,400 must be immediately refunded by the Lyon campaign.

The petition said that under state election law, the term "contributions" includes "all loans and transfers of money or other thing of value to or by any candidate."

Further, the law says, “No individual … shall … pay or make any contribution of money or other thing of value to a candidate who has established only a candidate committee, his campaign treasurer, deputy campaign treasurer or candidate committee which in the aggregate exceeds $2,600 per election,” the petition says.

Therefore, the petition says, “the current donation limit to single candidate committees like, ‘Lyon for Conservative Freeholder’ is $2,600 per person per election."

Lyon also cited state election law in the defense of his father’s contribution.

He cited the candidate’s guide issued by the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission: “There is no limit to the amount of personal funds a candidate may contribute or lend to his or her own campaign (except for publicly funded gubernatorial candidates). Also, a corporation one hundred percent of the stock of which is owned by the candidate, or by the candidate’s spouse, child, parent, or sibling residing in the candidate’s household, may make contributions without limit to a candidate committee established by that candidate, or to a joint candidates committee established by that candidate.”

“In plain English,” Lyon said, “we did nothing wrong.”

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

Lyon also made an expenditure of $14,225 for mailing of campaign literature on May 31.

The petition claims that because of Lyon father’s contribution, Lyon's campaign was able to place signs and conduct a last-minute mailing.

The petition further claims the failure to file the required 48-hour forms was a deliberate attempt to conceal the funding of the Lyon’s campaign in a way that placed Nordstrom at a disadvantage.

As proof, the petition points to a last-minute mailing by the Lyon campaign that attacked Nordstrom’s record.

“Nordstrom reasonably believed that Mr. Lyon would not have the funds available for such a substantial mailing,” the petition says. Without the illegal failure to disclose the donation, “Nordstrom would have been able to alter her campaign strategy to prepare for a last minute mailing by Mr. Lyon distorting her record that arrived one day prior to Election Day,” it says.

A failure to apply a penalty to the Lyon’s campaign for the alleged illegal contribution, the petition says, “would turn the campaign finance laws upside-down by indicating that [Election Law Enforcement Commission] rules do not apply to the very wealthy. It would send the message that wealthy friends or relatives of candidates could spend whatever they want to get a candidate elected; they could simply budget for a large fine, as an anticipated campaign expense.”