A Roselle council candidate and the Union County Board of Elections filed their opposition to a potential primary election redo in an ongoing case stemming from a tight primary
The close primary in Roselle has led to months of legal drama. Denise Wilkerson, the incumbent, defeated a primary challenge from Cynthia Johnson by three votes. Superior Court Judge John Deitch denied Johnson’s request for a recount earlier this summer, but an appellate court overruled him. The recount brought Wilkerson’s margin down to two votes, but kept her in the lead.
Johnson continued the legal challenges. Last week, her attorneys presented three voters whom Deitch ruled were illegally disenfranchised. With those findings, Deitch nullified the election and ordered a redo of the primary. Late last week, Deitch determined he didn’t have the authority to order a new election so late in the process and changed his mind. Instead, he told Roselle Democrats they had until this past Sunday to select a new candidate, which ended up being Johnson.
Wilkerson filed her appeal brief on Monday, arguing Deitch improperly applied a 1987 New Jersey Supreme Court decision — Fields v. Hoffman — to his decision to allow the Roselle Democratic Committee to pick a new nominee. Wilkerson’s brief states Fields applied to a dispute over write-in votes, and that the case is not “remotely applicable.” Wilkerson asked for a new primary, saying the Roselle Democratic Committee shouldn’t take that process from the voters.
Johnson’s brief disagrees, arguing that when the primary produces no nominee and leads to a vacancy this late in the process, it’s then up to local parties to pick the nominee.
“Where that nomination process is insufficient or inoperative, then the Legislature has provided for an alternative method for the political party to make a nomination by delegating the candidate selection to the statutorily created, municipal county committee, consisting of elected party representatives,” Johnson’s brief states.
Johnson’s brief argues a redo of the primary would be “unprecedented and not supported by any statutory remedy.”
Wilkerson argues the vacancy was only established in the first place because of Deitch’s handling of the case: “The trial court’s belated and erroneous decision 55 days prior to the election necessarily cannot create a vacancy.”
The Union County Board of Elections said Wilkerson should not be granted emergency relief because she lacks a strong challenge to the handling of the case.
“Wilkerson is not entitled to emergent relief because she has not established that she is likely to succeed on the merits of her challenge,” the board of elections’ brief states.
Union County Clerk Joanne Rajoppi chose not to file an opinion on the matter.
