House panel delves into disputed races Reviews vs. full-scale recounts at issue

AUGUSTA – Four Republicans and four Democrats assigned to the House Elections Committee held on Monday the first of what will be at least three meetings to resolve three contested House races.

Rep. Janet T. Mills, D-Farmington, the committee chairman, said she expected Republican and Democratic attorneys representing the opposing sides to do their best to guide them through their interpretations of challenged and disputed ballots.

“I suspect the parties and their counsel will attempt to focus us on specific issues related to the individual elections,” Mills said. “I don’t think we necessarily have to reinvent the wheel unless there’s an issue raised by a party.”

The three races at issue based on unofficial Election Night returns are:

. House District 139, where Michael J. McAlevey, D-Waterboro, has a 13-vote advantage over Lawrence E. Jacobsen, R-Waterboro.

. House District 43, claimed by Jayne Crosby Giles, R-Belfast, who leads Walter Ash Jr., D-Belfast, by 13 votes.

. House District 42, where incumbent Rep. Jeffrey Kaelin, R-Winterport, has a six-vote lead over Democrat Joseph Brooks, also of Winterport.

The panel members spent a good portion of their time Monday discussing which local voting officials should be sought for testimony and the need for access to the original recount information compiled by the Secretary of State’s Office last month. In addition to Mills, the eight-member legislative committee consists of Reps. Stan Gerzofsky, D-Brunswick; Patricia A. Blanchette, D-Bangor; William J. Smith, D-Van Buren; Joshua A. Tardy, R-Newport; Roger L. Sherman, R-Hodgdon; David N. Ott, R-York; and Kevin J. Glynn, R-South Portland.

Jim Case, an attorney representing the Democratic candidates, and David Emery, an attorney for the Republicans, expect most of the races will hinge on a number of ballots in each district that were flagged by the local registrars on Election Day because someone challenged a voter’s eligibility.

But Brooks, a former Democratic legislator posing the challenge in District 42, made it clear Monday he would like the panel to consider all of the more than 4,500 ballots cast in his district. State officials already have recounted the ballots once in a lengthy process that Brooks said did not conclude until 9 p.m.

“I saw people having difficulty reading and rubbing their eyes, and I’m wondering if I couldn’t ask to have the ballots checked one more time in a review by this committee to ensure accuracy,” he said.

Case then said he also would like to request a second recount for District 139, and the Republicans responded that if the Democrats were entitled to full recounts, then Crosby Giles should be given the same consideration in District 43.

“I think this committee has to make a decision today of whether we want to do a full-blown recount or just review the ballots disputed at the previous recounts,” said Blanchette. “There’s a big difference in the time frame if we have to go back and review [all of the ballots].”

Sherman said he “saw no advantage” in reviewing more than 15,000 ballots that already had been inspected and that he would oppose a second full-blown recount.

“I think that’s been beaten to death once from what I can gather,” Sherman said.

Mills and the committee decided to defer further discussion on the need for a second full-scale recount in the races until her panel meets again Dec. 13. A third meeting is scheduled for Dec. 17.

“Just because there’s a request for a recount doesn’t mean there’s automatically going to be a recount,” Mills said. “I think there are separate issues with each of these elections.”