Class status is, therefore, denied. In her reply, petitioner, for the first time, provides some details of the alleged misconduct. Accordingly, while I have reviewed petitioner's reply, I have not considered those portions that contain new allegations and assertions that were not originally contained in the petition. The appeal must be dismissed on the merits. Petitioner requests that I void the results of the special district meeting.
Petitioner provides no such affidavits or statements.
Petitioner provides absolutely no affidavits, exhibits, or other documents with her petition to support her allegations that respondent improperly solicited votes prior to the referendum or engaged in impermissible conduct at the polling site on the day of the referendum. Rather, petitioner merely asserts that respondent committed a variety of improper acts, and that those acts should serve as the basis for invalidating the results of the referendum. In two of the affidavits provided by respondent, however, it was admitted that copies of an informational brochure produced by the district were placed on a table behind the registration table. There is no evidence that any voters saw them. However, she has no knowledge of whether these individuals were within the zone within which electioneering is prohibited.