ALBANY – A judge reversed an Albany County Board of Elections decision to not allow a Glenmont man on the ballot this November because he did not have enough valid petition signatures.
Albany County State Supreme Court Michael Mackey issued a decision and order on Friday, July 7 that restored Kellin Rowlands to the ballot as a candidate for the Bethlehem Town Board under the Uniting Bethlehem party after he was removed by the Board of Elections on June 14.
The removal was initiated based on objections filed on June 5 by Bethlehem resident, Jeff Baker, for 256 of the 1,078 ballots submitted by Rowlands on May 26. Baker is a member of the Bethlehem Democratic Committee and serves as its 2nd Vice Chair.
According to the decision, “Baker alleged that certain line-by-line signatures were…illegible, did not contain the first name of the individual who allegedly signed the petition, were printed, or otherwise could not be matched to voter registration.”
In its review of Baker’s objections, the board of elections agreed with Baker, but did reduce the number of invalid signatures to 156 and conceded the board miscalculated the number of signatures by one, leaving Rowlands six signatures short of the required number of 928 needed to be on the ballot.
Rowlands hired attorney Matthew Clyne to review the objections and represent him in the proceedings. Clyne is a former Albany County Board of Elections Commissioner and is very familiar with objections to petition signatures.
After the BOE made its final determination, Clyne filed with the court to review the case and provide evidence the signatures were valid.
“It is really hard to compare signatures [on petitions] to those on file,” Clyne said. “Lots of the signatures on file are coming from DMV or other sources and are not of good quality.”
Clyne explained that the use of digital recording is not the same as a “wet ink” signature and that people’s signature may also change over time or because the method by which they are recorded is different.
At the Supreme Court’s evidentiary hearing on June 27, Clyne provided, and the court accepted evidence through witnesses and affidavits that supported the signatures of 10 people. In addition, Mackey reviewed the signature comparisons provided by the BOE, himself, and validated an additional 15 signatures.
“The court has compared the signatures of the [15 voters] with the signature cards on file with the Board and finds that they substantially compare and are valid,” he wrote in the ruling.
The decision orders the BOE to put Rowlands on the ballot. Baker said that he will not appeal but also said the BOE may on procedural grounds.
“The Board of Elections is not made up of Dems,” Baker said. “This is a rare opportunity where both sides, Dems and Republicans, came together. Both sides had problems with [Rowlands] petitions.”
Because this case is not for a primary and the election is in November, the court’s timeline for appeal will not be as short. The usual time allowed for an appeal in an election case is usually a matter of a few days. Spotlight News will report on any appeal when filed.
For now, Rowland said he is moving on.
“They [Democrats] observed my candidacy to be a real threat,” Rowlands said. “I am coming to this with very little experience. I am not part of the two major parties. I am the little guy here.”
Rowlands says that he can now open a campaign account and begin the race.
“I am in full-on campaign mode now. We have built out a campaign team and will begin fundraising,” he said. “My next step is to get out of the blocks fast and hard.”