§ 7557A. Complaint procedure; unlawful election activity altering result of election.

(a) A citizen of a municipality may submit a written complaint to the State Election Commissioner regarding any aspect of that municipality’s election activity that is contrary to state or federal law which altered or is reasonably likely to have altered the result of the election. Such complaint shall be filed no later than 20 days after the result of the municipal election shall have been certified by the municipality’s Board of Elections.

The complaint shall state with particularity:

(1) The action or activity that is contrary to state or federal law; and

(2) The specific basis for the complainant’s belief that such activity altered or is reasonably likely to have altered the result of the election…..

====

The election law is very clear and is designed to prevent an outside group with lots of money from dominating and one-siding an election before anyone has any idea it is being done…

This law was put in place for the protection of the majority of a municipality’s citizens.  It has been a long standing tradition grounded in Delaware election law, that every candidate, PAC, or group trying to influence an election file finance reports.  The first deadline is 30 days. The second one is 8 days.  Then the final one gets filed at the end of the year.

There was still a window under old law, where a person could spend from the 7th day onward, and the election would be over  two months old before any accountability would be mustered.  One could then see that one’s official was not the real choice of the people, but perhaps the choice of someone willing to put up a lot of money…

That window was closed by Tony DeLuca last year.  After the 7th day, every large expenditure has to be reported in 24 hours… thereby giving the public decent time to acknowledge its influence and use that as part of the electioneering decision.

Polly’s campaign spent $5000 on winning the election.  The PAC spent $45,000… That is a big expenditure.  Nine times what any other candidate spent.

The PAC did not acknowledge its existence until 14 minutes before the Election Office closed on the eve of the election….

At points beforehand,

  • they had previously made calls to organize.
  • Got promises of financing.
  • Designed and approved proofs of printing.
  • Put down a deposit for the printer.
  • Called and acquired manpower for their distribution
  • Paid in full all those who distributed the pamphlets.
  • Paid for gas for those vans distributing the pamphlets.

Every one of these acts is in violation of existing election law…

The (a) provision is fulfilled.

Now for the (b) provision…

(b) The State Election Commissioner shall review the complaint and such other materials as he or she deems necessary or appropriate. If, following such review, the Commissioner determines there is reasonable probability that conduct in violation of state or federal law altered or is reasonably likely to have altered the result of the election, then the Commissioner shall file suit in Superior Court on behalf of the complainant to invalidate the result of the election or such other relief as shall be appropriate.

===

As one can see from the text it is up the the subjectivity of the commissioner.  Which means if she chooses to ignore the overt influence caused by 9 times what any other campaigner spent across the municipal election, all of which was purposefully not legally reported, … she is free to do so.

She apparently taken that choice, and has chosen instead to reflect upon the sidebar of there being little evidence of misdirected voters, instead of a blatant gross violation of election law.  She has thereby reinforced the continuance of actions, this law was expressly passed to forbid.

One can never know who showed up at their regular polling place, which of course would be in its normal business operation as a school, office, etc, and seeing no polling signs, then left….

Could it have possibly been 116 people?  That is indeterminable.  But at a ratio of only 19 per district if falls within the areas of possibility, and we do know that in the districts where this literature was reported being hung, all voted overwhelmingly for the other candidate…. In fact, it appears that this entire $45,000 expense was not to promote a Data Center among voters most likely to be negatively impacted by its creation in their own back yards,  particularly in the two districts where it was distributed, …but to instead, confuse and obfuscate the proper location of the polling places in order to cut down the number of supporters who would actually vote, which if they did could overwhelm the election in favor of the candidate who was against the building of the power plant.

This leaves two  overwhelming clouds of doubt.  It leaves a cloud of doubt over the Commissioner of Elections… Is she kowtowing to the pressure to overrule common sense and allow this vote to continue? A doubt will always remain. This decision also casts doubt upon the current winner.  Is she the real choice of the voters, or was she put in solely by illegal methods despite the voters choice of a different direction?

When clouds of sulfurous gases, rare earth elements, and radioactive particles begin descending upon the patio furnature, pets, cars and children of Newark, the clouds of this election will become even more important….

The clouds of doubt need to be removed.

That is why the subjective will of the commissioner needs instead to nullify this election, for the very reason that all appearances portend that illegal activities have “perhaps” caused a mis-election….  The commissioner has taken great pains over the past to keep the aura of trust that Delaware’s elections are honest and open… Now with one fell swoop, she is throwing that out of the window?

Nine times the amount spent by any candidate, was dumped into this election… 9 times the amount… Campaign finance laws were broken, and based on the time line we can almost ascertain, done so with intent….

The only proper thing which would put this past behind us… would be to have a runoff election between the two top candidates….   it could be held in two weeks…

Only then, would we know… for sure…