Board decides against investigating election impropriety
The three-member Fayette County Election Board unanimously decided Wednesday against recommending further investigation of a Washington Township Democratic Party committeeman, believing Joseph Malaspina’s defense over charges of impropriety levied by Jeraldine T. “Jerry” Mazza of Franklin Township. The decision means that the board will not forward the matter to the district attorney for possible criminal investigation.
As he has said numerous times in the past, Malaspina testified that he didn’t know it was improper for him to circulate nominating petitions on behalf of two other candidates for the Democratic committee.
Malaspina, a resident of Washington Township’s voting District 2 who circulated petitions for candidates in that township’s District 1 and District 4, said he interpreted “political district” on the affidavit he signed to mean the entire township, not one of its precincts.
“When it said ‘political district’ on the back, it didn’t say ‘precinct’ or ‘ward.’ I was just trying to help (those two candidates) out. I did go into 1 and 4 (to get signatures),” said Malaspina. “I knew that I had to go into those areas to get signatures, but I didn’t know that I couldn’t do that.”
However, Mazza said that Malaspina was savvy enough to gather signatures for those candidates based on the signees living within the proper precincts. She also noted that he did not sign either of the other candidates’ petitions even though he was working on their behalf, which she said bolstered her contention that he knew what he was doing.
“You can’t live in three different districts,” said Mazza. “He had to know that he couldn’t circulate these petitions (on that basis).” Mazza added that she thinks Malaspina committed perjury by signing as the circulator of nominating petitions in three Washington Township voting districts, including his own.
When Mazza asked Malaspina why he didn’t sign the other candidates’ petitions if he thought they were good candidates, he replied, “Because I don’t live in their area.” Malaspina said he knew that he needed to get precinct-specific signatures for the candidates but didn’t think election law prohibited him from doing that as a township resident.
In his experience as a Democratic committeeman, Malaspina said that he’s been able to circulate petitions township-wide for positions such as supervisor, tax collector and auditor. He said he found out after the fact that you can’t do that for three positions: party committeeman or woman, constable and judge of elections.
Laurie Nicholson, director of the county’s Election Bureau, testified that Malaspina “genuinely did not know that he wasn’t supposed to” circulate petitions in precincts other than his own when she spoke with him after challenges were filed against the Districts 1 and 4 petitions. Those petitions were later invalidated by separate rulings in Fayette County Court.
After hearing the testimony, election board member Dave Lohr said that part of the blame and “negligence” falls back on the county for failing to provide candidates with better instruction and training. Lohr said the commissioners axed proposed funds for that purpose from this year’s budget.
Regarding Mazza’s charge that Malaspina committed perjury, Lohr said that you’d likely need a witness to make that charge stick in a court of law. “I don’t think the evidence is there,” said Lohr, who added that he “does not think it was a purposely done thing.”
Commission Chairman Vincent A. Vicites said Malaspina made an honest mistake and has openly admitted that. “I don’t see any demonstrated wrongful intent here on this,” said Vicites, who agreed with Lohr that the county should sponsor a yearly seminar to educate political candidates on legal nuances and possible pitfalls.
Commissioner Ronald M. Nehls, the third member of the election board, said that as an “experienced” committeeman, Malaspina should have known what he could and could not do in regard to circulating nominating petitions.
“I can say ‘shame on you’ for doing that,” said Nehls, who added that he thinks it’s up to the voters to ultimately cast judgment on Malaspina’s behavior.
At the start of the hearing, Mazza objected to Vicites’ presence on the board and asked him to recuse himself, on the grounds that he’s openly confirmed that Malaspina is a “personal friend” of his.
Assistant county solicitor Sheryl Heid told Vicites that he should recuse himself only if he feels he has a conflict. When she asked if he felt he could hear the evidence and reach a fair decision, Vicites replied, “absolutely.”
Mazza said at the outset that her main goal was having Malaspina removed from the county’s voter fraud panel, a group of volunteers appointed by the commissioners to monitor the integrity of the voting process and to make suggestions on improving the election system.
Malaspina has said that the criticisms levied against him are part of a political plot, as he is not aligned with Democrat Party Chairman Fred L. Lebder and is working to get like-minded Democratic committee candidates elected in Washington Township.