Elections officials in Enfield confirmed on Thursday that Tom Tyler, Democratic candidate for state House, won’t be on the Aug. 11 primary ballot. The move comes after a judge in Hartford rejected Tyler’s voter petition forms based on a series of technicalities.
Attorney Christopher Henderson, who represented the Enfield town clerk and Democratic registrar of voters in the case, tells WTIC the town is considering an appeal, but, “Concerning the ballot, the ballot order was placed shortly after the Court’s decision (Tuesday) and Mr. Tyler’s name will not be on the ballot.”
Tyler was hoping to challenge state Rep. John Santanella, the party-endorsed incumbent, for the seat from Connecticut’s House District 58.
Santanella filed the successful lawsuit, saying a number of rules had been broken in the course of Tyler’s petition filing. For one thing, he says the registrar of voters had provided Tyler with the blank petition forms prematurely.
“The law is very clear,” says Santanella. “Candidates should not be given access to petitions until seventy-seven days before the primary. That did not happen. Petitions were issued four days before they were legally allowed to be circulated (in May).”
Hartford Superior Court Judge Stuart Rosen agreed that Tyler was allowed access to the petition forms too soon. He also said the completed forms were turned in too late and lacked a page-by-page signature count.
“I think this case reinforces that, here in Connecticut, we follow the law when it comes to elections,” said Santanella.
Tyler says he’s also considering an appeal. Otherwise, he might run for the seat as an Independent in November’s general election.
He says he turned in almost three hundred valid signatures, and squarely blames the office of Secretary of the State Stephanie Thomas for any problems with his submission. The secretary’s office refused to comment for this story.
Tyler and Enfield Democratic Registrar Beth Jerez say the forms went out early because she was given the incorrect issue date by the secretary of the state’s office. In his opinion, Judge Rosen acknowledges that attorneys for the secretary’s office “acknowledged to Jerez that the SOTS training and calendar contained erroneous information and that registrars had not been timely notified of calendar revisions.”
Tyler and Jerez also say the same state elections officials provided a deficient version of the petition form, which omits a key line that tabulates the total number of signatures on a particular page.
“This form was defective from the secretary of state’s office,” said Tyler. “When you would go online to try to find a so-called ‘correct’ form, they don’t have it. This is the form you’re supposed to use.”
“It’s a catch-22 that appears to be a poison pill purposely put in, and it’s created a massive problem for anybody that wants to challenge the incumbent.”
