Showing posts with label Election. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Election. Show all posts
Thursday, September 11, 2008
RLC Endorsement
The Republican Liberty Caucus, a national political organization working to change the direction of the Republican Party in the direction of strengthening free markets, preserving individual rights, and limiting government has endorsed your candidacy in 2008. You can learn more about the RLC at www.RLC.org. You can view your endorsement at http://www.rlc.org/endorsements/candidates/ .
Saturday, August 2, 2008
Residency Complaint-Dennison
Residency complaint goes before top official - Motta: Laslovich not part of district
By MIKE DENNISON Missoulian State Bureau
HELENA - The state’s top political enforcer said Tuesday he’ll look into a complaint alleging state Sen. Jesse Laslovich, D-Anaconda, is not a legal resident of his own district.
But Commissioner of Political Practices Dennis Unsworth said accepting the revised complaint doesn’t necessarily mean he’ll resolve the question of Laslovich’s residence.
And the man who filed the complaint - Republican candidate Dick Motta of Philipsburg - said he’s not confident that Unsworth will rule on the issue.
“I think he’s going to dance around this thing and basically just tell me to take it to court,” Motta said Tuesday. “I think he’s going to try to get out of it, just because it’s a political football and (state officials) don’t want to deal with it.”
As for Laslovich, he said he’ll cooperate with any investigation, which he believes would show that he’s a legal resident of Senate District 43 and entitled to run for re-election this year.
“(Motta) can say that he doesn’t think I’m a resident of the district all he wants,” Laslovich said. “The law says that I am, period. I just think (his complaint) is a desperate act, and will continue to be met with the results that he’s not happy with.”
Laslovich, 27, is running for re-election in heavily Democratic SD43, which includes Anaconda, Deer Lodge, Philipsburg and Drummond. When he filed to run for re-election, he listed his parents’ address in Anaconda, although he and his wife, Jill, currently live and work in Helena.
Laslovich has said his job as an assistant attorney general in Helena is temporary and that he has always intended to return to Anaconda, where he grew up and which he considers home. His wife is an attorney with a private law firm in Helena.
Laslovich is registered to vote in Anaconda. State law says someone doesn’t lose their residency if they “go into another district of this state for temporary purposes with the intention of returning.”
Motta filed a complaint with Unsworth in early July, asking the commissioner to rule that Laslovich is not a resident of SD43 and therefore required to withdraw.
Unsworth rejected the complaint July 18, saying it didn’t cite a law under his jurisdiction. Motta refiled a new complaint last week, and Unsworth said Tuesday it meets all requirements for a legitimate complaint.
Laslovich now has until Aug. 15 to respond. Unsworth said after reviewing that response, he could dismiss the complaint and decline further investigation.
Unsworth indicated that Motta may have a difficult time showing that Laslovich violated the applicable law, which says a violation is only when someone “knowingly” makes a false statement on candidate filing material.
“There is a heavy emphasis on intent,” Unsworth said.
And even if Unsworth rules that Laslovich falsely stated his residency, Unsworth said he doesn’t have the power to remove Laslovich from the November ballot. A judge would have to take that action, at the request of someone else.
Copyright © 2008 Missoulian
By MIKE DENNISON Missoulian State Bureau
HELENA - The state’s top political enforcer said Tuesday he’ll look into a complaint alleging state Sen. Jesse Laslovich, D-Anaconda, is not a legal resident of his own district.
But Commissioner of Political Practices Dennis Unsworth said accepting the revised complaint doesn’t necessarily mean he’ll resolve the question of Laslovich’s residence.
And the man who filed the complaint - Republican candidate Dick Motta of Philipsburg - said he’s not confident that Unsworth will rule on the issue.
“I think he’s going to dance around this thing and basically just tell me to take it to court,” Motta said Tuesday. “I think he’s going to try to get out of it, just because it’s a political football and (state officials) don’t want to deal with it.”
As for Laslovich, he said he’ll cooperate with any investigation, which he believes would show that he’s a legal resident of Senate District 43 and entitled to run for re-election this year.
“(Motta) can say that he doesn’t think I’m a resident of the district all he wants,” Laslovich said. “The law says that I am, period. I just think (his complaint) is a desperate act, and will continue to be met with the results that he’s not happy with.”
Laslovich, 27, is running for re-election in heavily Democratic SD43, which includes Anaconda, Deer Lodge, Philipsburg and Drummond. When he filed to run for re-election, he listed his parents’ address in Anaconda, although he and his wife, Jill, currently live and work in Helena.
Laslovich has said his job as an assistant attorney general in Helena is temporary and that he has always intended to return to Anaconda, where he grew up and which he considers home. His wife is an attorney with a private law firm in Helena.
Laslovich is registered to vote in Anaconda. State law says someone doesn’t lose their residency if they “go into another district of this state for temporary purposes with the intention of returning.”
Motta filed a complaint with Unsworth in early July, asking the commissioner to rule that Laslovich is not a resident of SD43 and therefore required to withdraw.
Unsworth rejected the complaint July 18, saying it didn’t cite a law under his jurisdiction. Motta refiled a new complaint last week, and Unsworth said Tuesday it meets all requirements for a legitimate complaint.
Laslovich now has until Aug. 15 to respond. Unsworth said after reviewing that response, he could dismiss the complaint and decline further investigation.
Unsworth indicated that Motta may have a difficult time showing that Laslovich violated the applicable law, which says a violation is only when someone “knowingly” makes a false statement on candidate filing material.
“There is a heavy emphasis on intent,” Unsworth said.
And even if Unsworth rules that Laslovich falsely stated his residency, Unsworth said he doesn’t have the power to remove Laslovich from the November ballot. A judge would have to take that action, at the request of someone else.
Copyright © 2008 Missoulian
Sunday, July 27, 2008
Not My Job
The initial complaint had to be amended to satisfy the jurisdictional authority of the OPP. The OPP dismissed the initial complaint because it did not include a specific reference to a violation of the statutes between Title 35 and Title 37. Apparently, violations of Constitutional provisions aren't sufficient for the OPP to investigate. The SOS also expressed the limitation of their authority to be ministerial. You would think that something so basic as filing for legislative office would fall within their authority. When we vote, the registrar requires verification of your identity and address. According to the SOS's office they do not have authority to verify the name and address on the Nomination form. I asked if illegal aliens could file and they said "yes". Pay the fee and run for office. The Election Law handbook contains 252 pages of laws which apply to a candidate. The clerk advised me that if I didn't sign a form that she would remove me from the ballot. It's scary to realize that the clerk has more authority that the SOS or OPP. I don't comprehend the dual level of enforcement and authority, but that's "not my job" and they don't think it's theirs either.
Amended Complaint Addendum
Amended Complaint Addendum
Per the media articles contained as Exhibts D, Mr. Laslovich has publicly acknowledged that he is living in Helena and that he is temporarily working for the Attorney General's office in Helena. He has stated that the temporary appointment will terminate on December 31, 2008. Upon termination of the appointment, it is his announced intent to return to his parents residence at 112 Mountain View St., Anaconda, MT 59711.
As stated in the Complaint, Mr. Laslovich now resides in Helena. His physical residence is 1241 Otter Rd, Helena, MT 59602. Mr. Laslovich has changed residence from 112 Mountain View St, Anaconda, MT 59711. Whether this change is temporary or permanent is irrelevent. Mr. Laslovich has acknowledged that he does not in fact, presently reside at 112 Mountain View. He has removed himself from Senate District 43 and not notified or filed with the Secretary of State, a Declaration of Change of Address form pursuant to MCA 13-10-201.
It is required that candidates maintain residency within the district in which they intend to run. Maintaining residency is required for public officials who are not under a statutory obligation to reside elsewhere. Federal representatives must go to Washington, D.C., temporarily, in order to fulfill the requirements of office. Similiarly, the Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General and other State officials are statutorily required to reside in Helena for the term of their office. Military personnel temporarily reside in another location because of obligatory military commitments. Mr. Laslovich had no statutory obligation to temporarily relocate to Helena. To the contrary, once elected, the office-holder must remain a resident in the appropriate district or may be forced to withdraw.
The Montana Constitution requires that a candidate seeking nomination for legislative office be a resident of the district, “For six months next preceding the general election,”:
Article V -- THE LEGISLATURE Section 4. Qualifications.
“ A candidate for the legislature shall be a resident of the state for at least one year next preceding the general election. For six months next preceding the general election, he shall be a resident of the county if it contains one or more districts or of the district if it contains all or parts of more than one county.”
Mr. Laslovich has sworn on the Declaration for Nomination form that he possessed the qualifications to be a candidate for Senate District 43. Per the Declaration for Nomination form, the candidate is required to list his “residence (physical) address”. On the form, Mr. Laslovich swore that his physical address was 112 Mountain View, Anaconda, MT 59711. Mr. Laslovich physical address is 1241 Otter Rd., Helena, MT 59602. The form also states, “If the mailing address is different from the physical address, it must also be listed”. The mailing address listed is 112 Mountain View, Anaconda, MT 59711. I have been unable to confirm the mailing address, but it is totally impractical, that an individual living in Helena would have their mail directed to an address 96 miles away in Anaconda.
A candidate may have only one residence. If his stated intent is to return to Anaconda by December 31, 2008, then that is an acknowledgement that he is not physically residing in Anaconda. If he is no longer physically in Anaconda, then the Nomination Form is not a true representation of his qualification for nomination. If a candidate changes residence, a Declaration of Change of Address form is required to be filed with the Secretary of State within 15 days per 13-10-201 MCA (Exhibit H). The Declaration form has not been filed as required.
The Voter Registration Card form, (Exhibit I) 13-2-202 & 13-2-203 MCA, Voter Declaration requires that “I will have resided in this county for at least 30 days before the next election (unless exempt under 13-2-514(2) MCA”). Mrs. Jill Laslovich has filed for voter registration in Helena. Mr. Jesse Laslovich continues to declare that he resides in Anaconda.
Mr. Laslovich can have only one “residence”. He has sworn that his “(physical) residence” is 112 Mountain View, Anaconda, MT 59711. His physical address is 1241 Otter Rd., Helena, MT 59602. His physical address is different from his sworn address. He has not returned to the Anaconda address within the required time period for voter registration or legislative candidacy.
Using his parents address as his stated residence is a deceptive practice intended to deceive the voters into believing that he is a district resident qualified to be a candidate for Senate District 43.
Mr. Laslovich has not maintained a physical residence in Senate District 43 for the required six months preceeding the election, and therefore, does not possess the qualifications necessary to be a candidate for the district.
Mr. Laslovich has committed a deceptive election process as defined in Sections 13-35-207(4) and (10) by making “a false declaration of nomination and “a false oath or affidavit ... required by law.”
Per the media articles contained as Exhibts D, Mr. Laslovich has publicly acknowledged that he is living in Helena and that he is temporarily working for the Attorney General's office in Helena. He has stated that the temporary appointment will terminate on December 31, 2008. Upon termination of the appointment, it is his announced intent to return to his parents residence at 112 Mountain View St., Anaconda, MT 59711.
As stated in the Complaint, Mr. Laslovich now resides in Helena. His physical residence is 1241 Otter Rd, Helena, MT 59602. Mr. Laslovich has changed residence from 112 Mountain View St, Anaconda, MT 59711. Whether this change is temporary or permanent is irrelevent. Mr. Laslovich has acknowledged that he does not in fact, presently reside at 112 Mountain View. He has removed himself from Senate District 43 and not notified or filed with the Secretary of State, a Declaration of Change of Address form pursuant to MCA 13-10-201.
It is required that candidates maintain residency within the district in which they intend to run. Maintaining residency is required for public officials who are not under a statutory obligation to reside elsewhere. Federal representatives must go to Washington, D.C., temporarily, in order to fulfill the requirements of office. Similiarly, the Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General and other State officials are statutorily required to reside in Helena for the term of their office. Military personnel temporarily reside in another location because of obligatory military commitments. Mr. Laslovich had no statutory obligation to temporarily relocate to Helena. To the contrary, once elected, the office-holder must remain a resident in the appropriate district or may be forced to withdraw.
The Montana Constitution requires that a candidate seeking nomination for legislative office be a resident of the district, “For six months next preceding the general election,”:
Article V -- THE LEGISLATURE Section 4. Qualifications.
“ A candidate for the legislature shall be a resident of the state for at least one year next preceding the general election. For six months next preceding the general election, he shall be a resident of the county if it contains one or more districts or of the district if it contains all or parts of more than one county.”
Mr. Laslovich has sworn on the Declaration for Nomination form that he possessed the qualifications to be a candidate for Senate District 43. Per the Declaration for Nomination form, the candidate is required to list his “residence (physical) address”. On the form, Mr. Laslovich swore that his physical address was 112 Mountain View, Anaconda, MT 59711. Mr. Laslovich physical address is 1241 Otter Rd., Helena, MT 59602. The form also states, “If the mailing address is different from the physical address, it must also be listed”. The mailing address listed is 112 Mountain View, Anaconda, MT 59711. I have been unable to confirm the mailing address, but it is totally impractical, that an individual living in Helena would have their mail directed to an address 96 miles away in Anaconda.
A candidate may have only one residence. If his stated intent is to return to Anaconda by December 31, 2008, then that is an acknowledgement that he is not physically residing in Anaconda. If he is no longer physically in Anaconda, then the Nomination Form is not a true representation of his qualification for nomination. If a candidate changes residence, a Declaration of Change of Address form is required to be filed with the Secretary of State within 15 days per 13-10-201 MCA (Exhibit H). The Declaration form has not been filed as required.
The Voter Registration Card form, (Exhibit I) 13-2-202 & 13-2-203 MCA, Voter Declaration requires that “I will have resided in this county for at least 30 days before the next election (unless exempt under 13-2-514(2) MCA”). Mrs. Jill Laslovich has filed for voter registration in Helena. Mr. Jesse Laslovich continues to declare that he resides in Anaconda.
Mr. Laslovich can have only one “residence”. He has sworn that his “(physical) residence” is 112 Mountain View, Anaconda, MT 59711. His physical address is 1241 Otter Rd., Helena, MT 59602. His physical address is different from his sworn address. He has not returned to the Anaconda address within the required time period for voter registration or legislative candidacy.
Using his parents address as his stated residence is a deceptive practice intended to deceive the voters into believing that he is a district resident qualified to be a candidate for Senate District 43.
Mr. Laslovich has not maintained a physical residence in Senate District 43 for the required six months preceeding the election, and therefore, does not possess the qualifications necessary to be a candidate for the district.
Mr. Laslovich has committed a deceptive election process as defined in Sections 13-35-207(4) and (10) by making “a false declaration of nomination and “a false oath or affidavit ... required by law.”
Residency Comments
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Dick Motta of Phillipsburg is tilting at windmills.
State Sen. Jesse Laslovich, D-Anaconda, is not a legal resident of his Senate district and therefore should be disqualified from running for re-election, his Republican opponent said in a formal complaint filed this week.Dick Motta, a retired businessman from Philipsburg, filed the complaint Tuesday with the state commissioner of political practices.Sweet Home HelenaMotta said Laslovich, who works as a state attorney in Helena and owns a house there with his wife, has not been a resident of Anaconda or any other part of Senate District 43 for the required six months before the general election.
Actually, Laslovich need only live in the same County. This is the relevant section in Article V of the Montana Constitution:
Section 4. Qualifications. A candidate for the legislature shall be a resident of the state for at least one year next preceding the general election. For six months next preceding the general election, he shall be a resident of the county if it contains one or more districts or of the district if it contains all or parts of more than one county.
But you can see where Motta's coming from: Laslovich is supposed to represent SD 43 but for all intents and purposes is now a resident of Helena. See, a young man fresh out of school gets in the state legislature, and before you know it he's gotten a nice state job in Helena to go with it.
Laslovich has worked as an assistant attorney general in Helena since July 2007. He and his wife, Jill, also an attorney, bought a home in Helena in 2006 after she was hired by a law firm in Helena.Laslovich, who is registered to vote in Anaconda, listed his parents’ address when he filed to run for re-election in January.
He's not the only one. Word has it that former Rep. Kevin Furey spent precious little time in House District 91 after the got married and landed his own state job, even prior to his active duty with the Army Reserve.It kind of peeves some of the folks back home, but how can you expect a guy serve the public, support himself with a good state job and actually reside in his district all at the same time? And it's a slippery matter of proof where someone really lives.Clearly, this Motta guy is just being unreasonable.
Posted by Carol Minjares at 6:52 AM
Labels: 2008 election, Legislature
3 comments:
James said...
Clearly.
July 10, 2008 12:27 PM
Anonymous said...
Hey, Max Baucus doesn't live in Montana. So?
July 10, 2008 2:00 PM
Binky Griptight said...
Why not let the voters decide, rather than some bureaucrat (like the AG) or some tired old judge?Or, is wasting the administration and courts time part of a campaign these days?
July 10, 2008 7:52 PM
Monday, July 14, 2008
Residency Is All in Your Mind
Aha! The Missoulian's editorial writer ponders legislative candidate Dick Motta's complaint against Sen. Jesse Laslovich.
So how do the people Laslovich wants to represent feel about supporting a candidate who doesn't technically live there? Probably same as we in Montana feel about being represented by someone who doesn't live here. That would be U.S. Sen. Max Baucus, whose only claim to a home in Montana is his mother's residence. And for 11 years before he and his wife purchased that half, he didn't have any residence in Montana at all.That's in contrast to fellow U.S. Sen. Jon Tester, who rents a place in Washington, D.C., but returns to his farm near Big Sandy every weekend, and U.S. Rep. Denny Rehberg, who doesn't even rent an apartment in Washington. He sleeps on his office couch.
Heh! Good ol' Denny.
...it strikes us as the height of silliness that one's residency should hinge on one's intent. It boils down to the fact that elected officials make poor representatives if they don't have regular contact with the people they are supposed to represent.That's not to suggest that you should have to own a home to qualify as a candidate - but at the very least, the homes of family members you no longer live with should not count.What should matter is where you actually live right now - and we should make it clear to our legislative representatives that the statutory loophole that asks us to read candidates' minds in order to figure out where they live needs to be closed.
Does it matter that Laslovich has "gone Helena"? For right now, it's up to the voters to decide. Don't look for the next Legislature to do anything about this loophole.
Posted by Carol Minjares at 6:53 AM
Labels: 2008 election, Denny Rehberg, Dick Motta, Jesse Laslovich, Legislature, Max Baucus
2 comments:
Jim Lang said...
I live in HD 100 - is it true that neither the incumbent Republican nor the Democratic challenger lives in the district?
July 14, 2008 8:39 AM
Montana Headlines said...
Again, you do not have to live in the district -- you only have to live in the same county as the district.This is a very important allowance to make for the more heavily populated counties like Yellowstone and Missoula, since candidate recruitment is hard enough as it is. Someone who lives in the district generally has an advantage, since they start out with neighbors who know them, etc. But the distinctions are often fine ones, with a candidate who lives "outside the district" often just a few blocks away from the arbitrarily drawn district lines.Unless Helena and Anaconda are in the same county, Laslovich is in clear violation of the spirit of the rules -- even if the Commissioner of Political Practices, appointed by the current governor, refuses to enforce it by citing a technicality of "intent."
July 14, 2008 8:57 AM
Dick Motta of Phillipsburg is tilting at windmills.
State Sen. Jesse Laslovich, D-Anaconda, is not a legal resident of his Senate district and therefore should be disqualified from running for re-election, his Republican opponent said in a formal complaint filed this week.Dick Motta, a retired businessman from Philipsburg, filed the complaint Tuesday with the state commissioner of political practices.Sweet Home HelenaMotta said Laslovich, who works as a state attorney in Helena and owns a house there with his wife, has not been a resident of Anaconda or any other part of Senate District 43 for the required six months before the general election.
Actually, Laslovich need only live in the same County. This is the relevant section in Article V of the Montana Constitution:
Section 4. Qualifications. A candidate for the legislature shall be a resident of the state for at least one year next preceding the general election. For six months next preceding the general election, he shall be a resident of the county if it contains one or more districts or of the district if it contains all or parts of more than one county.
But you can see where Motta's coming from: Laslovich is supposed to represent SD 43 but for all intents and purposes is now a resident of Helena. See, a young man fresh out of school gets in the state legislature, and before you know it he's gotten a nice state job in Helena to go with it.
Laslovich has worked as an assistant attorney general in Helena since July 2007. He and his wife, Jill, also an attorney, bought a home in Helena in 2006 after she was hired by a law firm in Helena.Laslovich, who is registered to vote in Anaconda, listed his parents’ address when he filed to run for re-election in January.
He's not the only one. Word has it that former Rep. Kevin Furey spent precious little time in House District 91 after the got married and landed his own state job, even prior to his active duty with the Army Reserve.It kind of peeves some of the folks back home, but how can you expect a guy serve the public, support himself with a good state job and actually reside in his district all at the same time? And it's a slippery matter of proof where someone really lives.Clearly, this Motta guy is just being unreasonable.
Posted by Carol Minjares at 6:52 AM
Labels: 2008 election, Legislature
3 comments:
James said...
Clearly.
July 10, 2008 12:27 PM
Anonymous said...
Hey, Max Baucus doesn't live in Montana. So?
July 10, 2008 2:00 PM
Binky Griptight said...
Why not let the voters decide, rather than some bureaucrat (like the AG) or some tired old judge?Or, is wasting the administration and courts time part of a campaign these days?
July 10, 2008 7:52 PM
Monday, July 14, 2008
Residency Is All in Your Mind
Aha! The Missoulian's editorial writer ponders legislative candidate Dick Motta's complaint against Sen. Jesse Laslovich.
So how do the people Laslovich wants to represent feel about supporting a candidate who doesn't technically live there? Probably same as we in Montana feel about being represented by someone who doesn't live here. That would be U.S. Sen. Max Baucus, whose only claim to a home in Montana is his mother's residence. And for 11 years before he and his wife purchased that half, he didn't have any residence in Montana at all.That's in contrast to fellow U.S. Sen. Jon Tester, who rents a place in Washington, D.C., but returns to his farm near Big Sandy every weekend, and U.S. Rep. Denny Rehberg, who doesn't even rent an apartment in Washington. He sleeps on his office couch.
Heh! Good ol' Denny.
...it strikes us as the height of silliness that one's residency should hinge on one's intent. It boils down to the fact that elected officials make poor representatives if they don't have regular contact with the people they are supposed to represent.That's not to suggest that you should have to own a home to qualify as a candidate - but at the very least, the homes of family members you no longer live with should not count.What should matter is where you actually live right now - and we should make it clear to our legislative representatives that the statutory loophole that asks us to read candidates' minds in order to figure out where they live needs to be closed.
Does it matter that Laslovich has "gone Helena"? For right now, it's up to the voters to decide. Don't look for the next Legislature to do anything about this loophole.
Posted by Carol Minjares at 6:53 AM
Labels: 2008 election, Denny Rehberg, Dick Motta, Jesse Laslovich, Legislature, Max Baucus
2 comments:
Jim Lang said...
I live in HD 100 - is it true that neither the incumbent Republican nor the Democratic challenger lives in the district?
July 14, 2008 8:39 AM
Montana Headlines said...
Again, you do not have to live in the district -- you only have to live in the same county as the district.This is a very important allowance to make for the more heavily populated counties like Yellowstone and Missoula, since candidate recruitment is hard enough as it is. Someone who lives in the district generally has an advantage, since they start out with neighbors who know them, etc. But the distinctions are often fine ones, with a candidate who lives "outside the district" often just a few blocks away from the arbitrarily drawn district lines.Unless Helena and Anaconda are in the same county, Laslovich is in clear violation of the spirit of the rules -- even if the Commissioner of Political Practices, appointed by the current governor, refuses to enforce it by citing a technicality of "intent."
July 14, 2008 8:57 AM
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Physical Residence-Intended Residence
Residency shouldn't require mind reading - Monday, July 14, 2008 Missoulian
Where do you live? And how do you know you really live there?
Most of us would probably give a simple answer to these questions. We might say we live wherever it is that we pay rent, mortgage or property taxes. “Home” is the place where we lay our heads each night, or where we collect our mail. It's the address we provide when filling out our voter registration cards.
But if you're a candidate for public office in Montana, you might answer that question differently. You could say, for instance, that “home” is wherever you “intend” to live at some point in the future.
While the Montana Constitution requires that a candidate for state office reside within the district he would like to represent for at least six months prior to an election, the Montana Code Annotated goes on to explain just how to determine a candidate's true residence, and that explanation contains definitions like this: “The place where an individual's family resides is presumed to be that individual's place of residence. However, an individual who takes up or continues a residence at a place other than where the individual's family resides with the intention of remaining is a resident of the place where the individual resides.”
These sort of sentences seem to give a lot of weight to a candidate's intentions, and indeed, legal precedence largely backs that up.
The problem is, it's difficult, if not impossible, for anyone other than the candidate himself to know just where he “intends” to live.
And that seems to be the crux of Dick Motta's complaint, filed with the state Office of Political Practices on Tuesday.
“The whole word ‘intent' in my mind, is totally subjective,” he told the Missoulian this week. “From a legal point of view, you would think they would throw that out as being overly vague.”
Motta is running against Jesse Laslovich to represent Senate District 43, which covers voters in Deer Lodge and Granite counties.
A little more than a month ago, Montana House Speaker Scott Sales asked Attorney General Mike McGrath for a formal opinion on the Laslovich's residency, an opinion that McGrath rightly declined to provide. After all, Laslovich is an employee in his office.
Jesse Laslovich has been representing the district since he was first elected to a seat in the House. At the time, he was a student at the University of Montana and listed his parents' address in Anaconda as his own. He then ran unopposed for a seat in the Senate. He is now seeking re-election.
However, Laslovich has graduated from law school. About a year ago, he was appointed by McGrath to work in the Office of Consumer Protection in the Montana Department of Justice, and he has been working in Helena all that time. He also got married, and his wife works in Helena, too. They even bought a home - in Helena.
Nevertheless, Laslovich filed as a Senate candidate still using his parents' address, stating that he intends to return to Anaconda after his appointment with the Justice Department ends. Of course, he and his wife don't intend to move in with his parents, but rather to sell their house in Helena and look for property in Anaconda.
So how do the people Laslovich wants to represent feel about supporting a candidate who doesn't technically live there? Probably same as we in Montana feel about being represented by someone who doesn't live here. That would be U.S. Sen. Max Baucus, whose only claim to a home in Montana is his mother's residence. And for 11 years before he and his wife purchased that half, he didn't have any residence in Montana at all.
That's in contrast to fellow U.S. Sen. Jon Tester, who rents a place in Washington, D.C., but returns to his farm near Big Sandy every weekend, and U.S. Rep. Denny Rehberg, who doesn't even rent an apartment in Washington. He sleeps on his office couch.
The voters of Senate District 43 will decide for themselves whether Laslovich is an appropriate representative. Since Laslovich was previously elected to the House as a university student in Missoula, it stands to reason that at least some people in the district think he can do the job just fine.
“I've always been a person who leaves it to the will of the people,” Laslovich said. “I've had somebody say, Jesse, we'd vote for you if you lived on the moon.”
He told the Missoulian this while standing in his parents' kitchen, where he was in the middle of a tiling project. He also said he manages to visit his hometown regularly, and has always considered it “home.” He agreed that “the question of intent is a subjective one,” but pointed out that if that's how the law is read, he hasn't done anything wrong.
Motta, of course, disagrees. The state constitution, he contends, is pretty clear on this issue. If state statute contains contradictory provisions, that would merely mean the provisions are ... well, unconstitutional.
Most residency requirements tend to be more specific, he noted.
“You almost have to assume that this whole approach to ‘intent' is sort of an attempt to give legislators a way to reinterpret the statute,” Motta mused.
Indeed, it strikes us as the height of silliness that one's residency should hinge on one's intent. It boils down to the fact that elected officials make poor representatives if they don't have regular contact with the people they are supposed to represent.
That's not to suggest that you should have to own a home to qualify as a candidate - but at the very least, the homes of family members you no longer live with should not count.
What should matter is where you actually live right now - and we should make it clear to our legislative representatives that the statutory loophole that asks us to read candidates' minds in order to figure out where they live needs to be closed.
Copyright © 2008 Missoulian
Where do you live? And how do you know you really live there?
Most of us would probably give a simple answer to these questions. We might say we live wherever it is that we pay rent, mortgage or property taxes. “Home” is the place where we lay our heads each night, or where we collect our mail. It's the address we provide when filling out our voter registration cards.
But if you're a candidate for public office in Montana, you might answer that question differently. You could say, for instance, that “home” is wherever you “intend” to live at some point in the future.
While the Montana Constitution requires that a candidate for state office reside within the district he would like to represent for at least six months prior to an election, the Montana Code Annotated goes on to explain just how to determine a candidate's true residence, and that explanation contains definitions like this: “The place where an individual's family resides is presumed to be that individual's place of residence. However, an individual who takes up or continues a residence at a place other than where the individual's family resides with the intention of remaining is a resident of the place where the individual resides.”
These sort of sentences seem to give a lot of weight to a candidate's intentions, and indeed, legal precedence largely backs that up.
The problem is, it's difficult, if not impossible, for anyone other than the candidate himself to know just where he “intends” to live.
And that seems to be the crux of Dick Motta's complaint, filed with the state Office of Political Practices on Tuesday.
“The whole word ‘intent' in my mind, is totally subjective,” he told the Missoulian this week. “From a legal point of view, you would think they would throw that out as being overly vague.”
Motta is running against Jesse Laslovich to represent Senate District 43, which covers voters in Deer Lodge and Granite counties.
A little more than a month ago, Montana House Speaker Scott Sales asked Attorney General Mike McGrath for a formal opinion on the Laslovich's residency, an opinion that McGrath rightly declined to provide. After all, Laslovich is an employee in his office.
Jesse Laslovich has been representing the district since he was first elected to a seat in the House. At the time, he was a student at the University of Montana and listed his parents' address in Anaconda as his own. He then ran unopposed for a seat in the Senate. He is now seeking re-election.
However, Laslovich has graduated from law school. About a year ago, he was appointed by McGrath to work in the Office of Consumer Protection in the Montana Department of Justice, and he has been working in Helena all that time. He also got married, and his wife works in Helena, too. They even bought a home - in Helena.
Nevertheless, Laslovich filed as a Senate candidate still using his parents' address, stating that he intends to return to Anaconda after his appointment with the Justice Department ends. Of course, he and his wife don't intend to move in with his parents, but rather to sell their house in Helena and look for property in Anaconda.
So how do the people Laslovich wants to represent feel about supporting a candidate who doesn't technically live there? Probably same as we in Montana feel about being represented by someone who doesn't live here. That would be U.S. Sen. Max Baucus, whose only claim to a home in Montana is his mother's residence. And for 11 years before he and his wife purchased that half, he didn't have any residence in Montana at all.
That's in contrast to fellow U.S. Sen. Jon Tester, who rents a place in Washington, D.C., but returns to his farm near Big Sandy every weekend, and U.S. Rep. Denny Rehberg, who doesn't even rent an apartment in Washington. He sleeps on his office couch.
The voters of Senate District 43 will decide for themselves whether Laslovich is an appropriate representative. Since Laslovich was previously elected to the House as a university student in Missoula, it stands to reason that at least some people in the district think he can do the job just fine.
“I've always been a person who leaves it to the will of the people,” Laslovich said. “I've had somebody say, Jesse, we'd vote for you if you lived on the moon.”
He told the Missoulian this while standing in his parents' kitchen, where he was in the middle of a tiling project. He also said he manages to visit his hometown regularly, and has always considered it “home.” He agreed that “the question of intent is a subjective one,” but pointed out that if that's how the law is read, he hasn't done anything wrong.
Motta, of course, disagrees. The state constitution, he contends, is pretty clear on this issue. If state statute contains contradictory provisions, that would merely mean the provisions are ... well, unconstitutional.
Most residency requirements tend to be more specific, he noted.
“You almost have to assume that this whole approach to ‘intent' is sort of an attempt to give legislators a way to reinterpret the statute,” Motta mused.
Indeed, it strikes us as the height of silliness that one's residency should hinge on one's intent. It boils down to the fact that elected officials make poor representatives if they don't have regular contact with the people they are supposed to represent.
That's not to suggest that you should have to own a home to qualify as a candidate - but at the very least, the homes of family members you no longer live with should not count.
What should matter is where you actually live right now - and we should make it clear to our legislative representatives that the statutory loophole that asks us to read candidates' minds in order to figure out where they live needs to be closed.
Copyright © 2008 Missoulian
Monday, July 7, 2008
Draft Complaint Laslovich Residence
On the Secretary of State Nomination form, Jessee Laslovich specified that his mailing and physical address is 112 Mountain View St, Anaconda, MT 59711. Public records and newspaper articles indicate that he has changed his physical residence to 1241 Otter Rd, Helena, MT 59602. The Anaconda address, his parents home, is within the boundaries of Senate District 43. The Helena address is not within the boundaries and he has not been a resident of the Anaconda area for the required six months preceding the general election. Mr. Laslovich may have intended to return to Anaconda, but he has not fulfilled that commitment. Mr. Laslovich is not a resident of Senate District 43 and, therefore, does not qualify as a legislative candidate for that district. Based on the following and MCA 13-12-201, I request that the Office of Political Practice investigate this complaint and that the Secretary of State notify Mr. Laslovich that he is required to withdraw as a Candidate for Senate District 43.
The Montana Constitution, Article V, Section 4, Qualifications specifies residency as a qualification for the Legislature. The operative word “shall” means that residency is required and that a legislative candidate must be a resident of the district for a period of six months prior to the general election.
Article V -- THE LEGISLATURE Section 4. Qualifications.
“ A candidate for the legislature shall be a resident of the state for at least one year next preceding the general election. For six months next preceding the general election, he shall be a resident of the county if it contains one or more districts or of the district if it contains all or parts of more than one county.”
The subjective terms, “intent” or “state of mind”, are not contained in the Qualification clause. Based on the wording of the Article, objective factors for determining residency over-ride any subjective factors such as “intent”.
Per MCA 1-1-215. Residence-rules for determining, an individual may only have one residence:
Every person has, in law, a residence. In determining the place of residence, the following rules are to be observed: (1) It is the place where a person remains when not called elsewhere for labor or other special or temporary purpose and to which the person returns in seasons of repose. (2) There may be only one residence. If a person claims a residence within Montana for any purpose, then that location is the person's residence for all purposes unless there is a specific statutory exception.
(3) A residence cannot be lost until another is gained.
The question is whether Mr. Laslovich's residence is at 1241 Otter Rd., Helena, MT 59602 (Exhibit A) where he resides with his wife, or whether he resides at his parents home at 112 Mountain View ST, Anaconda, MT 59711 (Exhibit B). It also raises the question of whether Mr. Laslovich is returning to Anaconda temporarily as a candidate for Senate District 43. Per MCA 1-1-215, there may only be “one residence”. Per Article V, Qualifications, the candidate “shall” be a resident of the district for six months. Per MCA 13-1-112. Rules for determining residence:
“For registration, voting, or seeking election to the legislature, the residence of an individual must be determined by the following rules as far as they are applicable:
(5) An individual may not gain a residence in a county if the individual comes in for temporary purposes without the intention of making that county the individual's home. (7) The place where an individual's family resides is presumed to be that individual's place of residence. However, an individual who takes up or continues a residence at a place other than where the individual's family resides with the intention of remaining is a resident of the place where the individual resides. (8) A change of residence may be made only by the act of removal joined with intent to remain in another place.”
Per MCA 13-1-101(4) Definitions - Voter registration information is subject to verification by the Secretary of State:
"Application for voter registration" means a voter registration form prescribed by the secretary of state that is completed and signed by an elector, submitted to the election administrator, and contains voter registration information subject to verification as provided by law.”
The Declaration for Nomination form requires that a candidate provide a residence (physical) address and a mailing address if different from the physical. The statute also provides a Declaration of Change of Address form prescribed by the Secretary of State. Per MCA 13-10-201 (5),
“(a) The declaration for nomination must be in the form and contain the information prescribed by the secretary of state.(b) A person seeking nomination to the legislature shall provide the secretary of state with a street address, legal description, or road designation to indicate the person's place of residence. If a candidate for the legislature changes residence, the candidate shall, within 15 days after the change, notify the secretary of state on a form prescribed by the secretary of state.”
On the excerpted Nomination Form, (Exhibit C) Mr. Laslovich specified that both his mailing and physical address was 112 Mountain View St., Anaconda, MT 59711. The Anaconda address is his parents residence and it is owned by Laslovich Construction. Per the Missoulian and Montana Standard articles, (Exhibit D) January 26, 2008, Mike Denison, Standard State Bureau, “Laslovich, 27, said Friday he has used that address for his entire career in the Legislature, including his first two terms in the state House, when he was a student at the University of Montana in Missoula”. The article further states that Laslovich graduated from the UM law school in 2006, was hired as an assistant attorney for the Justice Department in Helena and that he and his wife, Jill (maiden-name Peterson) bought a house in Helena. Jill Laslovich is an attorney for the law firm of Crowley, Haughey, Hanson, Toole and Dietrich.
Based on the preceeding factors, the Laslovichs' are no longer students, have graduated law school, have created a family entity, established residence in Helena, are employed in Helena and are pursuing careers in Helena, not Anaconda. Per the Helena Independent Record, the Laslovichs', Jesse Anthony Laslovich and Jill Opal Peterson, were married on 11/22/07. Attached (Exhibit E) is a letter, 05/27/08, from the Department of Administration, State Personnel Division, confirming that Jesse Laslovich is currently employed by the Department of Justice. Mr. Laslovich has acknowledged that he is employed by the Justice Department, but claims that the appointment is temporary until December 31, 2008. The underlying assumption is that he intends to return to Anaconda upon termination of the appointment. Whether that intent will be fulfilled is subject to conjecture. Even if the intent is fulfilled in January, 2009, it is not timely when determining residency and eligibility as a candidate for Senate District 43. In fact, Mr. Laslovich is currently employed and residing in Helena. Per the Crowley, Haughey profile, Jill Laslovich is in Helena practicing in the firm's Litigation Department:
“Jill Laslovich graduated with high honors from the University of Montana in 2003 with a degree in Political Science, and from the University of Montana School of Law in May of 2006. During law school, she competed on the National Moot Court Team, placing first in the region and advancing to the national finals. Mrs. Laslovich currently practices in the Helena office in the firm's Litigation Department.”
Per the Lewis and Clark County Tax Records, Exhibit F, Jessee Laslovich and Jill Peterson purchased the property on July 14, 2006 and are currently residing at 1241 Otter Rd, Helena, MT 59602. The mailing address for the tax data is 1241 Otter Rd, the property tax payments for the second half of 2007 have been paid and the data was last updated 06/24/08. In response to my request for voter registration information, the Lewis and Clark Voter Registrar, Marilyn Bracken, emailed:
Request:
“I would like to know if Jesse A. Laslovich - Jill 0. Laslovich - Jill O. Peterson, 1241 Otter Rd., Helena, MT 59602-7637 are registered voters for any Helena voting precincts.”
Response:
“From: "Marilyn Bracken"
“We have a Jill Laslovich registered at 1241 Otter Rd.”
Objective factors for determining residency are home ownership, employment, registration, precinct designation, district designation, taxpayer status and time in the district. For elections, one of the first questions asked at the polling booth is where do you reside. Based on your answer, you are directed to the precinct where your voter registration has been predetermined and verified. Based on the precinct and voter registration, the elector is eligible to vote for various public offices and initiatives. A county resident may not vote for city/town officials. In the case of a County Commissioner, each district is defined and unless you are a resident of that district you may not run for that office. Initiatives similarly apply to various districts and precincts and your eligibility to vote on the initiative is determined by your residence. District Judges must reside in the district over which they will preside. The redistricting process in 2003 determined district guidelines and redefined where an elector must reside in order to be eligible to vote and seek nomination for legislative office. In the case of Granite County, all electors were reassigned to a new senate district. The residents were never consulted on the redistricting and there certainly was no consideration given to their “intent” to reside in the new district. After redistricting, residence determined where the elector would vote and the specified boundaries determined eligibility for voting on various ballot issues and public offices.
The significance of residency as the basis for determining eligibility to legislative office was highlighted in the Montana Districting Plan. Per the Plan footnote, “Incumbent legislators may not be eligible to run in the new districts based on residency or term.” The underlying assumption was that in order to be elected to legislative office a candidate must reside in the new district.
As Submitted to the Secretary of State By the Montana Districting and Apportionment Commission In Fulfillment of Article V, section 14, of the Montana Constitution and section 5-1-111, MCA February 5, 2003. Senate District 43 is comprised of House District 85 and 86. The Boundaries are:
“House District 85 includes the southwest corner of Powell County (5,283 persons), including the city of Deer Lodge and northern Deer Lodge County (3,311 persons). The boundary in Deer Lodge County 37 from the west uses the Denton Point road to Highway 1 to Linden Street in Anaconda where it switches to the railroad tracks through Anaconda using the northern track. On the east side of Anaconda, it continues following the railroad track east to the county line.
House District 86 includes all of Granite County (2,830 persons) and the southern two-thirds of Deer Lodge County (6,106 persons) south of Highway 1 and the railroad tracks. (In Anaconda, the northern track is the boundary).”
Included as Exhibit G, is a Google Earth Direction guide between the parents' residence, 112 Mountain View Rd, Anaconda, MT and 1241 Otter Rd., Helena, MT. The distance is 96 miles and the estimated drive time is 1 hour and 48 minutes. Mr. Laslovich has not indicated that he commutes to work in Helena from Anaconda. Mr. Laslovich lives in Helena with his wife and commutes to work in Helena. When considering all the objective factors, Mr. Laslovich resides in Helena, not Anaconda. Mr. Laslovich's future plans and intent are subject to conjecture. As a Helena resident, he is not eligible to be a candidate for Senate District 43.
Based on the preceding, I request that the residency of Mr. Laslovich be determined by the Office of Political Practice and that the Secretary of State notify the candidate to withdraw consistent with the provisions of MCA 13-12-201- Secretary of state to certify ballot:
(1) Seventy-five days or more before an election, except as provided in 13-10-208, the secretary of state shall certify to the election administrators the name and party or other designation of each candidate entitled to appear on the ballot and the ballot issues as shown in the official records of the secretary of state's office, which must include the notification specified in 13-37-126.
(2) The election administrator shall certify the name and party or other designation of each candidate entitled to appear on the ballot and the ballot issues as shown in the official records of the election administrator's office, which must include the notification specified in 13-37-126, and shall have the official ballots prepared. If a candidate for the legislature is no longer eligible under Article V, section 4, of the Montana constitution to seek the office for which the candidate has filed because the candidate has changed residence, the secretary of state shall notify the candidate that the candidate is required to withdraw as provided in 13-10-325.
The Montana Constitution, Article V, Section 4, Qualifications specifies residency as a qualification for the Legislature. The operative word “shall” means that residency is required and that a legislative candidate must be a resident of the district for a period of six months prior to the general election.
Article V -- THE LEGISLATURE Section 4. Qualifications.
“ A candidate for the legislature shall be a resident of the state for at least one year next preceding the general election. For six months next preceding the general election, he shall be a resident of the county if it contains one or more districts or of the district if it contains all or parts of more than one county.”
The subjective terms, “intent” or “state of mind”, are not contained in the Qualification clause. Based on the wording of the Article, objective factors for determining residency over-ride any subjective factors such as “intent”.
Per MCA 1-1-215. Residence-rules for determining, an individual may only have one residence:
Every person has, in law, a residence. In determining the place of residence, the following rules are to be observed: (1) It is the place where a person remains when not called elsewhere for labor or other special or temporary purpose and to which the person returns in seasons of repose. (2) There may be only one residence. If a person claims a residence within Montana for any purpose, then that location is the person's residence for all purposes unless there is a specific statutory exception.
(3) A residence cannot be lost until another is gained.
The question is whether Mr. Laslovich's residence is at 1241 Otter Rd., Helena, MT 59602 (Exhibit A) where he resides with his wife, or whether he resides at his parents home at 112 Mountain View ST, Anaconda, MT 59711 (Exhibit B). It also raises the question of whether Mr. Laslovich is returning to Anaconda temporarily as a candidate for Senate District 43. Per MCA 1-1-215, there may only be “one residence”. Per Article V, Qualifications, the candidate “shall” be a resident of the district for six months. Per MCA 13-1-112. Rules for determining residence:
“For registration, voting, or seeking election to the legislature, the residence of an individual must be determined by the following rules as far as they are applicable:
(5) An individual may not gain a residence in a county if the individual comes in for temporary purposes without the intention of making that county the individual's home. (7) The place where an individual's family resides is presumed to be that individual's place of residence. However, an individual who takes up or continues a residence at a place other than where the individual's family resides with the intention of remaining is a resident of the place where the individual resides. (8) A change of residence may be made only by the act of removal joined with intent to remain in another place.”
Per MCA 13-1-101(4) Definitions - Voter registration information is subject to verification by the Secretary of State:
"Application for voter registration" means a voter registration form prescribed by the secretary of state that is completed and signed by an elector, submitted to the election administrator, and contains voter registration information subject to verification as provided by law.”
The Declaration for Nomination form requires that a candidate provide a residence (physical) address and a mailing address if different from the physical. The statute also provides a Declaration of Change of Address form prescribed by the Secretary of State. Per MCA 13-10-201 (5),
“(a) The declaration for nomination must be in the form and contain the information prescribed by the secretary of state.(b) A person seeking nomination to the legislature shall provide the secretary of state with a street address, legal description, or road designation to indicate the person's place of residence. If a candidate for the legislature changes residence, the candidate shall, within 15 days after the change, notify the secretary of state on a form prescribed by the secretary of state.”
On the excerpted Nomination Form, (Exhibit C) Mr. Laslovich specified that both his mailing and physical address was 112 Mountain View St., Anaconda, MT 59711. The Anaconda address is his parents residence and it is owned by Laslovich Construction. Per the Missoulian and Montana Standard articles, (Exhibit D) January 26, 2008, Mike Denison, Standard State Bureau, “Laslovich, 27, said Friday he has used that address for his entire career in the Legislature, including his first two terms in the state House, when he was a student at the University of Montana in Missoula”. The article further states that Laslovich graduated from the UM law school in 2006, was hired as an assistant attorney for the Justice Department in Helena and that he and his wife, Jill (maiden-name Peterson) bought a house in Helena. Jill Laslovich is an attorney for the law firm of Crowley, Haughey, Hanson, Toole and Dietrich.
Based on the preceeding factors, the Laslovichs' are no longer students, have graduated law school, have created a family entity, established residence in Helena, are employed in Helena and are pursuing careers in Helena, not Anaconda. Per the Helena Independent Record, the Laslovichs', Jesse Anthony Laslovich and Jill Opal Peterson, were married on 11/22/07. Attached (Exhibit E) is a letter, 05/27/08, from the Department of Administration, State Personnel Division, confirming that Jesse Laslovich is currently employed by the Department of Justice. Mr. Laslovich has acknowledged that he is employed by the Justice Department, but claims that the appointment is temporary until December 31, 2008. The underlying assumption is that he intends to return to Anaconda upon termination of the appointment. Whether that intent will be fulfilled is subject to conjecture. Even if the intent is fulfilled in January, 2009, it is not timely when determining residency and eligibility as a candidate for Senate District 43. In fact, Mr. Laslovich is currently employed and residing in Helena. Per the Crowley, Haughey profile, Jill Laslovich is in Helena practicing in the firm's Litigation Department:
“Jill Laslovich graduated with high honors from the University of Montana in 2003 with a degree in Political Science, and from the University of Montana School of Law in May of 2006. During law school, she competed on the National Moot Court Team, placing first in the region and advancing to the national finals. Mrs. Laslovich currently practices in the Helena office in the firm's Litigation Department.”
Per the Lewis and Clark County Tax Records, Exhibit F, Jessee Laslovich and Jill Peterson purchased the property on July 14, 2006 and are currently residing at 1241 Otter Rd, Helena, MT 59602. The mailing address for the tax data is 1241 Otter Rd, the property tax payments for the second half of 2007 have been paid and the data was last updated 06/24/08. In response to my request for voter registration information, the Lewis and Clark Voter Registrar, Marilyn Bracken, emailed:
Request:
“I would like to know if Jesse A. Laslovich - Jill 0. Laslovich - Jill O. Peterson, 1241 Otter Rd., Helena, MT 59602-7637 are registered voters for any Helena voting precincts.”
Response:
“From: "Marilyn Bracken"
“We have a Jill Laslovich registered at 1241 Otter Rd.”
Objective factors for determining residency are home ownership, employment, registration, precinct designation, district designation, taxpayer status and time in the district. For elections, one of the first questions asked at the polling booth is where do you reside. Based on your answer, you are directed to the precinct where your voter registration has been predetermined and verified. Based on the precinct and voter registration, the elector is eligible to vote for various public offices and initiatives. A county resident may not vote for city/town officials. In the case of a County Commissioner, each district is defined and unless you are a resident of that district you may not run for that office. Initiatives similarly apply to various districts and precincts and your eligibility to vote on the initiative is determined by your residence. District Judges must reside in the district over which they will preside. The redistricting process in 2003 determined district guidelines and redefined where an elector must reside in order to be eligible to vote and seek nomination for legislative office. In the case of Granite County, all electors were reassigned to a new senate district. The residents were never consulted on the redistricting and there certainly was no consideration given to their “intent” to reside in the new district. After redistricting, residence determined where the elector would vote and the specified boundaries determined eligibility for voting on various ballot issues and public offices.
The significance of residency as the basis for determining eligibility to legislative office was highlighted in the Montana Districting Plan. Per the Plan footnote, “Incumbent legislators may not be eligible to run in the new districts based on residency or term.” The underlying assumption was that in order to be elected to legislative office a candidate must reside in the new district.
As Submitted to the Secretary of State By the Montana Districting and Apportionment Commission In Fulfillment of Article V, section 14, of the Montana Constitution and section 5-1-111, MCA February 5, 2003. Senate District 43 is comprised of House District 85 and 86. The Boundaries are:
“House District 85 includes the southwest corner of Powell County (5,283 persons), including the city of Deer Lodge and northern Deer Lodge County (3,311 persons). The boundary in Deer Lodge County 37 from the west uses the Denton Point road to Highway 1 to Linden Street in Anaconda where it switches to the railroad tracks through Anaconda using the northern track. On the east side of Anaconda, it continues following the railroad track east to the county line.
House District 86 includes all of Granite County (2,830 persons) and the southern two-thirds of Deer Lodge County (6,106 persons) south of Highway 1 and the railroad tracks. (In Anaconda, the northern track is the boundary).”
Included as Exhibit G, is a Google Earth Direction guide between the parents' residence, 112 Mountain View Rd, Anaconda, MT and 1241 Otter Rd., Helena, MT. The distance is 96 miles and the estimated drive time is 1 hour and 48 minutes. Mr. Laslovich has not indicated that he commutes to work in Helena from Anaconda. Mr. Laslovich lives in Helena with his wife and commutes to work in Helena. When considering all the objective factors, Mr. Laslovich resides in Helena, not Anaconda. Mr. Laslovich's future plans and intent are subject to conjecture. As a Helena resident, he is not eligible to be a candidate for Senate District 43.
Based on the preceding, I request that the residency of Mr. Laslovich be determined by the Office of Political Practice and that the Secretary of State notify the candidate to withdraw consistent with the provisions of MCA 13-12-201- Secretary of state to certify ballot:
(1) Seventy-five days or more before an election, except as provided in 13-10-208, the secretary of state shall certify to the election administrators the name and party or other designation of each candidate entitled to appear on the ballot and the ballot issues as shown in the official records of the secretary of state's office, which must include the notification specified in 13-37-126.
(2) The election administrator shall certify the name and party or other designation of each candidate entitled to appear on the ballot and the ballot issues as shown in the official records of the election administrator's office, which must include the notification specified in 13-37-126, and shall have the official ballots prepared. If a candidate for the legislature is no longer eligible under Article V, section 4, of the Montana constitution to seek the office for which the candidate has filed because the candidate has changed residence, the secretary of state shall notify the candidate that the candidate is required to withdraw as provided in 13-10-325.
Monday, June 16, 2008
AG - No Opinion Laslovich Residence
McGrath declines GOP request on senator's residency
Posted on June 13By MATT GOURAS of the Associated Press
HELENA - Attorney General Mike McGrath told the House speaker Friday that he won't be looking into the residency status of a state lawmaker who works in his office.
McGrath said Scott Sales' request does not conform with the requirements for a formal attorney general opinion.
Sales, a Republican, asked McGrath last week to look into the residency of Democratic Sen. Jesse Laslovich. Sales said he doesn't think Laslovich lives in Anaconda and shouldn't be able to represent the area.
But McGrath, in a letter to Sales, said attorney general opinions are reserved for questions of law, and are not meant for fact-finding.
Sales did not immediately return a call seeking comment.
McGrath also said state law allows the House speaker to ask for formal legal opinions only on issues related to the office. He said the residency of Laslovich does not relate to Sales' position.
The attorney general also referred to an analysis done by legislative attorney Greg Petesch, where Petesch says a candidate's intent is a big part of determining residency. Petesch also says state law allows for lawmakers to temporarily move with the intention of returning.
Past decisions on the issue have found that residency is largely a matter of intent.
But McGrath said he wasn't in a position to make a determination on Laslovich because "no mechanism exists in the opinion process for the gathering of evidence through investigation and hearing and determination of factual issues."
Laslovich, a lawyer, also works in McGrath's office and owns a Helena home. He used his parents' Anaconda address when he filed for re-election, and has said he doesn't consider Helena his permanent residence in part because his current job is a temporary one.
The Democrat has said that Sales' request is "a little bit of politics."
Copyright © 2008 Missoulian
Posted on June 13By MATT GOURAS of the Associated Press
HELENA - Attorney General Mike McGrath told the House speaker Friday that he won't be looking into the residency status of a state lawmaker who works in his office.
McGrath said Scott Sales' request does not conform with the requirements for a formal attorney general opinion.
Sales, a Republican, asked McGrath last week to look into the residency of Democratic Sen. Jesse Laslovich. Sales said he doesn't think Laslovich lives in Anaconda and shouldn't be able to represent the area.
But McGrath, in a letter to Sales, said attorney general opinions are reserved for questions of law, and are not meant for fact-finding.
Sales did not immediately return a call seeking comment.
McGrath also said state law allows the House speaker to ask for formal legal opinions only on issues related to the office. He said the residency of Laslovich does not relate to Sales' position.
The attorney general also referred to an analysis done by legislative attorney Greg Petesch, where Petesch says a candidate's intent is a big part of determining residency. Petesch also says state law allows for lawmakers to temporarily move with the intention of returning.
Past decisions on the issue have found that residency is largely a matter of intent.
But McGrath said he wasn't in a position to make a determination on Laslovich because "no mechanism exists in the opinion process for the gathering of evidence through investigation and hearing and determination of factual issues."
Laslovich, a lawyer, also works in McGrath's office and owns a Helena home. He used his parents' Anaconda address when he filed for re-election, and has said he doesn't consider Helena his permanent residence in part because his current job is a temporary one.
The Democrat has said that Sales' request is "a little bit of politics."
Copyright © 2008 Missoulian
Sunday, June 8, 2008
Laslovich Residency Response
June 7, 2008
Letter to Editor
Mike Denision's, Standard State Bureau, article, “Legislator's Residency in Question”, reported that House Speaker Scott Sales asked Attorney General, Mike McGrath, for a formal opinion on the residency of Senator Jesse Laslovich. I'm the Republican candidate for Senate District 43. Until the article was published, I was not aware that Mr. Sales had filed a formal complaint with the AG. I'm also in the process of questioning Mr. Laslovich's residency with the Secretary of State's office and the Office of Political Practice. At this point, I considered the residency question an administrative matter to be resolved by one of the agencies. Requesting a formal opinion from the AG converts what should be an administrative matter to a legal and ethical issue. Mike McGrath, AG, is the one who hired Mr. Laslovich. The AG appears to have a conflict of interest and should not issue an opinion concerning Laslovich's residency.
Mr. Laslovich's candidacy raises two Constitutional issues, separation of powers and district residency. As a legislator, Mr. Laslovich is Chairman of the Judicial and Ethics Committees. Although he's still a legislator, Mr. Laslovich is working for the Attorney General's Office of Consumer Protection. The Separation of Powers clause states, “No person or persons charged with the exercise of power properly belonging to one branch shall exercise any power properly belonging to either of the others...”. Concerning residency, the Legislative Qualification clause states, “ For six months next preceding the general election, he shall be a resident of the county if it contains one or more districts”. From an objective point of view, Mr. Laslovich is working in Helena for the AG, his wife is working for a Helena law firm and their residence is in Helena. Mr. Laslovich stated that residency “boils down to the intent of the person...” and that he uses his parents address because he considers Anaconda his home. When he was attending law school, his parents' address was his residence. Now that he's graduated law school, married, employed and living in Helena, the response that he considers Anaconda his “intended” residence is no longer persuasive or appropriate.
Dick Motta
Candidate Senate District 43
Letter to Editor
Mike Denision's, Standard State Bureau, article, “Legislator's Residency in Question”, reported that House Speaker Scott Sales asked Attorney General, Mike McGrath, for a formal opinion on the residency of Senator Jesse Laslovich. I'm the Republican candidate for Senate District 43. Until the article was published, I was not aware that Mr. Sales had filed a formal complaint with the AG. I'm also in the process of questioning Mr. Laslovich's residency with the Secretary of State's office and the Office of Political Practice. At this point, I considered the residency question an administrative matter to be resolved by one of the agencies. Requesting a formal opinion from the AG converts what should be an administrative matter to a legal and ethical issue. Mike McGrath, AG, is the one who hired Mr. Laslovich. The AG appears to have a conflict of interest and should not issue an opinion concerning Laslovich's residency.
Mr. Laslovich's candidacy raises two Constitutional issues, separation of powers and district residency. As a legislator, Mr. Laslovich is Chairman of the Judicial and Ethics Committees. Although he's still a legislator, Mr. Laslovich is working for the Attorney General's Office of Consumer Protection. The Separation of Powers clause states, “No person or persons charged with the exercise of power properly belonging to one branch shall exercise any power properly belonging to either of the others...”. Concerning residency, the Legislative Qualification clause states, “ For six months next preceding the general election, he shall be a resident of the county if it contains one or more districts”. From an objective point of view, Mr. Laslovich is working in Helena for the AG, his wife is working for a Helena law firm and their residence is in Helena. Mr. Laslovich stated that residency “boils down to the intent of the person...” and that he uses his parents address because he considers Anaconda his home. When he was attending law school, his parents' address was his residence. Now that he's graduated law school, married, employed and living in Helena, the response that he considers Anaconda his “intended” residence is no longer persuasive or appropriate.
Dick Motta
Candidate Senate District 43
Laslovich Residency Questioned
Legislator’s residency in question
By Mike Dennison, Standard State Bureau - 06/06/2008
HELENA — The Republican speaker of the Montana House is questioning whether state Sen. Jesse Laslovich, D-Anaconda, is a legal resident of the district where Laslovich is running for re-election.
On Thursday, House Speaker Scott Sales asked Attorney General Mike McGrath for a formal opinion on whether Laslovich, who lives and works in Helena, is a resident of Senate District 43, the Anaconda-Deer Lodge district he represents.
Laslovich works in Helena as an assistant attorney general, doing legal work for the Office of Consumer Protection in the state Justice Department. He was appointed to the position in July 2007 by McGrath, a Democrat.
“I don’t think that, geographically and according to the law, that (Laslovich) is the right guy to be running over there (in Senate District 43),” said Sales, a Bozeman Republican.
“The fact that he’s an employee of the Department of Justice makes it even more important that some sort of decision be rendered on it,” Sales added.
Lynn Solomon, spokeswoman for the attorney general, said the office hadn’t yet received Sales’ written request, and would respond once it did.
Laslovich said Thursday the state law on residency “boils down to the intent of the person, where he intends to be or intends to live,” and that he still considers Anaconda to be his home.
Laslovich said he and his wife, Jill, bought a home in Helena in 2006 after she got a job working as an attorney for a law firm in Helena. He worked for a Missoula law firm until July 2007, when he was appointed to his position in Helena.
Laslovich filed to run for re-election in January and listed his parents’ address in Anaconda as his residence. He said Thursday that his job in Helena expires at the end of this year, so he doesn’t consider Helena his permanent residence.
“I’m outside (of the Senate district) for temporary purposes; my job is clearly temporary,” he said. “I’m registered to vote in Anaconda. I’m in Anaconda more than I’m in Helena.
“If (Sales) had a question about my residency, he should have called me himself. I would have been happy to explain to him what is going on in my life.” Sales’ request for a formal attorney general’s opinion “is a little bit of politics,” Laslovich said.
In his letter to McGrath, Sales said since Laslovich and his wife own a home in Helena and have jobs there, “it stretches the imagination that it is the intent of Mr. Laslovich to return to his parents’ house in Anaconda any time soon, if ever.” Laslovich, 27, is opposed in the general election by Republican Dick Motta of Philipsburg. SD43 contains Deer Lodge and Granite counties and the southern portion of Powell County, including the city of Deer Lodge.
http://www.mtstandard.com/articles/2008/06/06/state_top/20080606_state_top.txt
By Mike Dennison, Standard State Bureau - 06/06/2008
HELENA — The Republican speaker of the Montana House is questioning whether state Sen. Jesse Laslovich, D-Anaconda, is a legal resident of the district where Laslovich is running for re-election.
On Thursday, House Speaker Scott Sales asked Attorney General Mike McGrath for a formal opinion on whether Laslovich, who lives and works in Helena, is a resident of Senate District 43, the Anaconda-Deer Lodge district he represents.
Laslovich works in Helena as an assistant attorney general, doing legal work for the Office of Consumer Protection in the state Justice Department. He was appointed to the position in July 2007 by McGrath, a Democrat.
“I don’t think that, geographically and according to the law, that (Laslovich) is the right guy to be running over there (in Senate District 43),” said Sales, a Bozeman Republican.
“The fact that he’s an employee of the Department of Justice makes it even more important that some sort of decision be rendered on it,” Sales added.
Lynn Solomon, spokeswoman for the attorney general, said the office hadn’t yet received Sales’ written request, and would respond once it did.
Laslovich said Thursday the state law on residency “boils down to the intent of the person, where he intends to be or intends to live,” and that he still considers Anaconda to be his home.
Laslovich said he and his wife, Jill, bought a home in Helena in 2006 after she got a job working as an attorney for a law firm in Helena. He worked for a Missoula law firm until July 2007, when he was appointed to his position in Helena.
Laslovich filed to run for re-election in January and listed his parents’ address in Anaconda as his residence. He said Thursday that his job in Helena expires at the end of this year, so he doesn’t consider Helena his permanent residence.
“I’m outside (of the Senate district) for temporary purposes; my job is clearly temporary,” he said. “I’m registered to vote in Anaconda. I’m in Anaconda more than I’m in Helena.
“If (Sales) had a question about my residency, he should have called me himself. I would have been happy to explain to him what is going on in my life.” Sales’ request for a formal attorney general’s opinion “is a little bit of politics,” Laslovich said.
In his letter to McGrath, Sales said since Laslovich and his wife own a home in Helena and have jobs there, “it stretches the imagination that it is the intent of Mr. Laslovich to return to his parents’ house in Anaconda any time soon, if ever.” Laslovich, 27, is opposed in the general election by Republican Dick Motta of Philipsburg. SD43 contains Deer Lodge and Granite counties and the southern portion of Powell County, including the city of Deer Lodge.
http://www.mtstandard.com/articles/2008/06/06/state_top/20080606_state_top.txt
Monday, June 2, 2008
Election Laws
Montana Constitution
Montana Codes Annotated Index
Article 3 -- General Government
Section 1. Separation of Powers. The power of the government of this state is divided into three distinct branches—legislative, executive, and judicial. No person or persons charged with the exercise of power properly belonging to one branch shall exercise any power properly belonging to either of the others, except as in this constitution expressly directed or permitted.”
Article IV -- SUFFRAGE AND ELECTIONS
Section 4. Eligibility for public office. Any qualified elector is eligible to any public office except as otherwise provided in this constitution. The legislature may provide additional qualifications but no person convicted of a felony shall be eligible to hold office until his final discharge from state supervision.
Article V -- THE LEGISLATURE
Section 4. Qualifications. A candidate for the legislature shall be a resident of the state for at least one year next preceding the general election. For six months next preceding the general election, he shall be a resident of the county if it contains one or more districts or of the district if it contains all or parts of more than one county.
2-2-111. Rules of conduct for legislators. Proof of commission of any act enumerated in this section is proof that the legislator committing the act has breached the legislator's public duty. A legislator may not: (1) accept a fee, contingent fee, or any other compensation, except the official compensation provided by statute, for promoting or opposing the passage of legislation; (2) seek other employment for the legislator or solicit a contract for the legislator's services by the use of the office; or (3) accept a fee or other compensation, except as provided for in 5-2-302, from a Montana state agency or a political subdivision of the state of Montana for speaking to the agency or political subdivision.
2-2-135. Ethics committees. (1) Each house of the legislature shall establish an ethics committee. Subject to 5-5-234, the committee must consist of two members of the majority party and two members of the minority party. The committees may meet jointly. Each committee shall educate members concerning the provisions of this part concerning legislators and may consider conflicts between public duty and private interest as provided in 2-2-112. The joint committee may consider matters affecting the entire legislature. (2) Pursuant to Article V, section 10, of the Montana constitution, the legislature is responsible for enforcement of the provisions of this part concerning legislators.
13-36-101. Grounds for contest of nomination or election to public office. An elector may contest the right of any person to any nomination or election to public office for which the elector has the right to vote, for any of the following causes: (1) on the ground of a deliberate, serious, and material violation of any provision of the law relating to nominations or elections; (2) whenever the person whose right is contested was not, at the time of the election, eligible to such office; (3) on account of illegal votes or an erroneous or fraudulent count or canvass of votes.
13-36-102. Time for commencing contest. (1) Five days or less after a candidate has been certified as nominated, a person wishing to contest the nomination to any public office shall give notice in writing to the candidate whose nomination he intends to contest, briefly stating the cause for the contest. The contestant shall make application to the district court in the county where the contest is to be had. The judge shall then set the time for the hearing. The contestant shall serve notice 3 days before the hearing is scheduled. The notice shall state the time and place of the hearing. (2) Any action to contest the right of a candidate to be declared elected to an office or to annul and set aside such election or to remove from or deprive any person of an office of which he is the incumbent for any offense mentioned in this title must, unless a different time is stated, be commenced within 1 year after the day of election at which such offense was committed.
Montana Codes Annotated Index
Article 3 -- General Government
Section 1. Separation of Powers. The power of the government of this state is divided into three distinct branches—legislative, executive, and judicial. No person or persons charged with the exercise of power properly belonging to one branch shall exercise any power properly belonging to either of the others, except as in this constitution expressly directed or permitted.”
Article IV -- SUFFRAGE AND ELECTIONS
Section 4. Eligibility for public office. Any qualified elector is eligible to any public office except as otherwise provided in this constitution. The legislature may provide additional qualifications but no person convicted of a felony shall be eligible to hold office until his final discharge from state supervision.
Article V -- THE LEGISLATURE
Section 4. Qualifications. A candidate for the legislature shall be a resident of the state for at least one year next preceding the general election. For six months next preceding the general election, he shall be a resident of the county if it contains one or more districts or of the district if it contains all or parts of more than one county.
2-2-111. Rules of conduct for legislators. Proof of commission of any act enumerated in this section is proof that the legislator committing the act has breached the legislator's public duty. A legislator may not: (1) accept a fee, contingent fee, or any other compensation, except the official compensation provided by statute, for promoting or opposing the passage of legislation; (2) seek other employment for the legislator or solicit a contract for the legislator's services by the use of the office; or (3) accept a fee or other compensation, except as provided for in 5-2-302, from a Montana state agency or a political subdivision of the state of Montana for speaking to the agency or political subdivision.
2-2-135. Ethics committees. (1) Each house of the legislature shall establish an ethics committee. Subject to 5-5-234, the committee must consist of two members of the majority party and two members of the minority party. The committees may meet jointly. Each committee shall educate members concerning the provisions of this part concerning legislators and may consider conflicts between public duty and private interest as provided in 2-2-112. The joint committee may consider matters affecting the entire legislature. (2) Pursuant to Article V, section 10, of the Montana constitution, the legislature is responsible for enforcement of the provisions of this part concerning legislators.
13-36-101. Grounds for contest of nomination or election to public office. An elector may contest the right of any person to any nomination or election to public office for which the elector has the right to vote, for any of the following causes: (1) on the ground of a deliberate, serious, and material violation of any provision of the law relating to nominations or elections; (2) whenever the person whose right is contested was not, at the time of the election, eligible to such office; (3) on account of illegal votes or an erroneous or fraudulent count or canvass of votes.
13-36-102. Time for commencing contest. (1) Five days or less after a candidate has been certified as nominated, a person wishing to contest the nomination to any public office shall give notice in writing to the candidate whose nomination he intends to contest, briefly stating the cause for the contest. The contestant shall make application to the district court in the county where the contest is to be had. The judge shall then set the time for the hearing. The contestant shall serve notice 3 days before the hearing is scheduled. The notice shall state the time and place of the hearing. (2) Any action to contest the right of a candidate to be declared elected to an office or to annul and set aside such election or to remove from or deprive any person of an office of which he is the incumbent for any offense mentioned in this title must, unless a different time is stated, be commenced within 1 year after the day of election at which such offense was committed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)