Voter fraud raised in 2009 Waterville election…
The reality is there are people who vote where they don’t live, they don’t often get caught but in this case, two women who happen to be the daughters of a current Waterville Council person have been accused of breaking Ohio’s election laws. Waterville councilwoman’s daughters accused of voter fraud is being reported by the Toledo Free Press. Part of the news piece:
On Jan. 29, Jan Lowe, of Waterville, submitted a letter to the Lucas County Board of Elections (BOE) challenging two voter registrations.
Lowe contested the registrations of Ruthann Cherry and Lisa Cherry, claiming evidence demonstrates that neither live in Waterville and neither are eligible to vote in Waterville. She also requested an investigation into “their possible fraudulent voter registration and actions to commit voter fraud in past elections.”
The letter states both women voted in the November 2009 election in which their mother, Ann Cherry, was up for and won reelection to the Village of Waterville council. Evidence was submitted that claims the daughters own property, work or reside in other cities or states.
“There is an overwhelming amount of evidence that suggests Ruthann Cherry lives … in Springboro, Ohio,” Lowe wrote. “Warren County property records show Ruthann Cherry owns property [there]. Also, Defiance College Alumni information states Ruthann Cherry and her husband … reside in Springboro.”
It’s also reported:
Lowe, the central committee secretary for the Lucas County Republican Party faction led by Jeff Simpson,wrote in her letter to the BOE that Waterville has had a number village council elections decided by fewer than four votes.
Ann Cherry a Democrat, was not involved in any close electoral outcomes in 2009, 2005 or 2001, however there was one election in 2007 where there was a four vote difference between
John Gouttiere and Norm Witzler, both appear to be Democrats from Lucas County voter file information. There was also another Waterville Council election where one vote separated the two candidates, and created an automatic recount but that was back in 2003.
From Lucas County Board of Elections election results, those who won are in bold:
2009:
JEFFREY J. MARTY 1127 21.66%
ANN CHERRY 1020 19.60% (36 votes more)
MICHAEL METZGER 984 18.91%
STEPHEN IMES 958 18.41%
NORM WITZLER 727 13.97%
Judy K. Pittman 362 6.96%
2007:
JIM VALTIN 1050 21.79%
TIM GUZMAN 956 19.84%
JOHN GOUTTIERE 890 18.47% (4 votes more)
NORM WITZLER 886 18.39%
BOB BRAKENWAGEN 659 13.68%
CRAIG ALLEN CLULEY 377 7.82%
2005:
DEREK MERRIN 1232 27.97%
LORI A. BRODIE 1137 25.81%
ANN CHERRY 1048 23.79% (60 votes more)
NORM WITZLER 988 22.43%
2003:
PAULINE W. GLAZA 949 21.86%
JOE BECKLER 893 20.57%
TIM GUZMAN * 842 19.40% (1 vote more)
JEFFREY J. MARTY * 841 19.37%
ROBIN L. MADIGAN 816 18.80%
As to voting records for Ruthann Cherry, she is not registered to a political party as of recent Lucas County voting records however it lists the previous elections voted:
2009 NOV GENERAL
2008 PRESIDENTIAL GENERAL
2006 NOV GENERAL
2005 NOV GENERAL
2004 GEN PRESIDENTIAL
2003 NOV GENERAL
2002 NOV GENERAL
2001 NOV GENERAL
2000 NOV GENERAL
Lisa Cherry is listed as a Democrat according to recent Lucas County voting records and voted in the following elections:
2009 NOV GENERAL
2008 PRESIDENTIAL GENERAL
2007 NOV GENERAL
2007 MAY PRIMARY OR SPECIAL
2006 NOV GENERAL
2005 NOV GENERAL
2004 GEN PRESIDENTIAL
2004 MAR PRIMARY
2003 NOV GENERAL
2002 NOV GENERAL
This indicates that Ruthann Cherry did not vote during the 2007 election where 4 votes separated two candidates, Lisa Cherry did vote in 2007, her linked in profile says she began her job in August of 2007. Both did vote in the 2003 election where only one vote separated two candidates.
I’m calling for a full scale recount! Stephen Imes and Craig Cluley were robbed!
February 6th, 2010 at 10:58 amMore than just a recount should be called for. Even if she won legitimately without her daughter’s votes, she should still resign.
I wanna know who knew what and when. What are the odds that a mother knew or even put her daughters up to this?
If she knew, and that is a big speculative IF, Cherry should resign immediately and apologize for bastardizing the election process of Waterville.
What makes this potential voter fraud case even more disgusting is the fact that literally a handful of votes can determine an election.
February 6th, 2010 at 11:37 amTom, you’ll note in looking at the numbers that none of the races that involved Cherry directly were impacted by one or two votes. Which does not make it any less of an issue as far as the legal aspect of her daughters voting when they had moved.
My problem with it is this is a huge selective enforcement issue. There are hundreds of people who vote from the wrong address. But it is not all the fault of the BOE, I’ll give you an example, they send out postcards and if someone is not living at that address the postman is not supposed to deliver it. It’s supposed to be returned to sender.
Yet, the post office still delivers some of them. So, if the proper resident does not mark it as “return to sender” the BOE is never notified. In the Cherry case, the two daughters are registered to their home address. There was one case I pointed out in the presidential primary election where the person did not live here, even changed addresses so that they could vote in the presidential primary here instead of the state they were really living in and nothing was done. It was stated that person “intended to return” – Ohio’s laws as to what really determines residency are not quite as simple as “you moved”. From the SOS:
This means basically the four year rule is the one easiest to prove. Which if the above cards are not delivered, delays the process.
February 6th, 2010 at 11:55 amBecause they can’t enforce all does not mean they shouldn’t enforce blatant cases that come to their attention.
Someone needs to get Ann Cherry on the record. Is she for or against voter fraud? Its sickening to think an elected official may have possibly been a conduit in this case.
February 6th, 2010 at 12:04 pmI’m not suggesting they don’t enforce it, merely pointing out that the enforcement is selective and rare and that it is a much larger issue than some realize. Also that the way the residency laws are written, it makes it more difficult to prove in some cases. In this case, it is going to be more difficult for the one who actually purchased property and got married to argue the “intent to return.”
February 6th, 2010 at 12:10 pmI’d also point out that considering elected officials and candidates for elected office have played residency games, the real solution is for there to be a look at voter residency laws and to develop a federal standard.
February 6th, 2010 at 12:12 pmSO is this a non-issue?
February 6th, 2010 at 12:23 pmIt is an important issue, but it’s one that extends beyond this particular story. So I wouldn’t call it a non-issue, I’d call it a starter story. If it ends here with these two? Not much will really change and there does not appear to have been any direct electoral benefit to Ann Cherry. Which if there was, if the races she was in were decided by a one or two vote margin, it’d be a larger issue.
February 6th, 2010 at 12:29 pmI would still like to know what Cherry knew.
Also, the intent matters. If the daughters knew they were supposed to change information and didnt so they could vote for their mom, and then if their mom knew and/or encouraged it, something should be done. True, her races weren’t decided by 2 votes, but as an elected official in Waterville, she prob knew it is likely that 2 votes could swing the election.
I want to know intent.
February 6th, 2010 at 12:49 pmI certainly don’t agree with selective enforcement, but enforcement of our election laws need to start sometime. What’s the use of abandoning punch card ballots because of the difficulty of determining the intent of hanging chads to get more accurate voting machines if we let human beings violate the voting laws? Why should we not hold human beings accountable for screwing up the voting process?
For the 2003 election decided by one vote, we don’t know if Cherry favored Guzman over Marty or not, but her preference could definitely have factored into how her daughters voted, and it could have changed the outcome.
If Cherry won’t resign over this (it’s unimaginable that she would be clueless about what her daughters were up to) then I would urge Waterville voters to never elect Cherry again. No one should be gaming the system like this and getting away without any repercussions.
If no action is taken, even after this has been publicized in the news coverage, then others might decide to take chances on gaming the system, too. Democracy unravels if this isn’t nipped in the bud.
February 6th, 2010 at 2:03 pmIn 2003 with both women being in college that’s not probably going to be a factor, the questions of when both moved came later. One moved in August of 2007. Which means as I pointed out, the only close election where one voted was in 2007. The election was in November, she moved in August/September, which makes that argument one of was it a permanent move at that time. The votes in 2008 and 2009 are most likely the ones that would be focused on, while there was no close electoral outcome in 2008 and 2009, that doesn’t negate the question of voter fraud/law breaking.
February 6th, 2010 at 2:10 pmThe democrat leadership in the county should ask her to resign. Surely the democrats don’t want to have their own version Jon Stainbrook running around making a mess. They can take the cue from the republicans and nip this in the bud before it escalates out of control.
February 6th, 2010 at 7:18 pmCherry needs to voluntarily step aside until all allegations are cleared.
February 6th, 2010 at 7:40 pmNorm Witzler is a Dem for sure. i believe he ran against Kaczala in 1998. Or at least thought about it!
February 8th, 2010 at 1:46 pm