Opinion ID: 2384041
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: The Pollution of the Petition Drive Process

Text: All of the circulators identified as working with Stars and Stripes fall within the Challengers' allegation that there was a pervasive pattern of fraud, forgeries and other improprieties that permeated the petition circulation process, as well as within the Board's finding that such a pervasive pattern did, in fact, exist, which polluted the petition drive operation conducted by Stars and Stripes. The Board's finding in this regard warrants the exclusion of all signatures collected by Stars and Stripes circulators. This is not a case of isolated instances of wrongdoing, but rather a petition drive process that was polluted with irregularities and improprieties. [21] The unrebutted evidence confirmed that fact. Indeed, the evidence showed that 83% of the subpoenaed circulators from the Red Roof Inn who came forward to testify  all of whom were from Stars and Stripes  testified to false signings in which they were involved or with which they were associated. Further, several of these witnesses testified not to individual acts of wrongdoing in an otherwise lawfully functioning system, but to an operation in which false signings were an established practice. This testimony was supported by written and oral complaints as well as by some of the petition sheets themselves. It was further supported by evidence that the petition drive was managed in such a manner and conducted in such a context as to facilitate and encourage precisely the types of irregularities and improprieties about which there was testimony. Given the evidence presented, the individuals who testified  far from representing isolated instances of wrongdoing  more likely represented examples of various ways in which the established pattern of false signing irregularities was manifested. [22] This type and consistent pattern of adverse evidence requires a response. However, the Citizens Committee provided none. The Citizens Committee provided no evidence which contradicted the individual acts of wrongdoing to which the witnesses testified. It provided no evidence to rebut the established practice of false signings in which Mike Jones was identified as playing a key role. It provided no evidence that contradicted the accounts presented by those who filed oral and/or written complaints. It provided no evidence to rebut the physical evidence presented by the altered circulator affidavits  indeed, it conceded the vast majority of those challenged sheets. And finally, it made no apparent effort to produce witnesses who could not be located through the Board's subpoena process. As the Board found, there was a deafening silence in the face of the indisputably troubling evidence of wrongdoing. (BOEE Ex. 69 at 48, 49). In the absence of rebuttal evidence which addresses the evidence of pervasive false signing irregularities, the taint on the entire Stars and Stripes process requires the rejection of all signatures associated therewith. ( See Attachment A). [23]