In Toms River, write-in mishap forces fire election run-off

A New Jersey appellate court ordered the redo of a February fire commissioner election in Toms River after a write-in vote mishap and a series of other ballot issues.

Two seats were up for grabs. The first was claimed by Richard Tutela, who won 690 votes and whose victory is not in question in the case. Behind Tutela were Anthony Cirz and Michael Hopson, who, according to initial certified results, received 615 votes. The initial certified results also showed James Golden to receive 614 votes and a total of five write-in votes.

After the certification, election officials apparently realized two of the write-in votes had gone to candidates listed on the ballot — one to Cirz, and one to Golden. Dawn Halliwell, the Fire District’s financial clerk, asked the Ocean County Board of Elections whether to count write-in votes for candidates who also appeared on the ballot. She was informed the Board of Election “would not count” those votes, but Halliwell then made a “unilateral decision” to count the votes anyway, saying the fire district “d[id]n’t have a policy and it’s our election.”

The new results — which were certified and posted after the fire district treasurer’s “attorney friend” said to publish the revised tally — showed Cirz as the winner, now with 616 votes.

Hopson filed suit, pointing to precedent to argue the write-in votes for Cirz and Golden should not have counted. In the April trial, Cirz presented a number of voters whose ballots were not counted, either due to issues with how their ballots were filled out or issues in how their ballots were mailed in.

The trial court went on to rule that the write-in votes for Cirz and Golden should be counted, because the voter’s intention was clear. That same court ruled the mail-in ballots presented should not be accepted because of the clear deadlines and guidelines set out in New Jersey’s elections statutes. With those rulings, the court determined Cirz had won the second commissioner seat.

The appellate division agreed that the mail-in ballots should not be accepted, but determined the write-in votes for Cirz and Golden should also be nullified, citing a similar case in Ocean County. The appellate panel, which consisted of Judges Robert Gilson, Lisa Firko, and Avis Bishop-Thompson, thus reversed the ruling that Cirz had won and set up a run-off between Cirz and Hopson. In its 39-page opinion, the panel criticized the administration of the election, saying the results should not depend on who is running it.

“Moreover, the record makes clear the results would have been different if the election had been overseen by the Board [of Elections] because the Board informed Halliwell that its policy was not to count a write-in vote for a named candidate,” the appellate court’s decision read. “A difference in outcome based solely on the administrator of the election—in February or November—does not serve the public interest.”