Lawsuit seeks accurate voter list

Current and former candidates in East Providence say last week's certification of the list of registered voters was an endorsement of voter fraud.

01:00 AM EDT on Monday, October 18, 2004

BY KAREN A. DAVIS
Providence Journal Staff Writer

PROVIDENCE A group of East Providence political candidates and supporters has filed a lawsuit in Superior Court to compel the local board of canvassers to take steps to improve the accuracy of the city's voting roster.

At a news conference on Friday, after the lawsuit was filed, the plaintiffs criticized the East Providence Canvassing Board for certifying the voting roster at a hearing last Tuesday.

The plaintiffs allege that certification of the list was an endorsement of voter fraud, because they believe the list contains hundreds of people who no longer live in East Providence, according to Michael Robinson, a candidate and a lawyer who filed the lawsuit.

Plaintiffs include Robinson, a Republican who is running for House District 64; Rep. Brian G. Coogan, who lost in last month's Democratic primary; Maryann Gobern Mathews, who lost her bids for School Committee and the City Council in the primary; Senate District 18 Republican candidate Lloyd Monroe; Richard G. Croke Sr., a former member of the Democratic City Committee, and Richard G. Croke Jr., a Democrat who withdrew from the race for Senate District 18 before the primary; House District 63 Republican candidate Robert Cusack; former mayor Bruce Rogers, and John Fahey, a former member of the Democratic Ward 3 Committee.

Named as defendants are canvassing board members Michael P. Solomon and Thomas Riley and canvassing clerk Maryann Callahan.

The lawsuit alleges that the board violated the rights of East Providence voters by denying them a "full and fair election" process.

Robinson said they want a judge to prohibit the city from using the current voter registration list and use the state-generated Central Voter Registration System, a new list that uses digital mapping, census data and postal information to bring make statewide voting rosters more accurate.

Failing that, the plaintiffs want the board to have voters whose eligibility is in question to use provisional ballots. Robinson said the provisional ballots could be reviewed and verified after the election.

Michael Solomon, chairman of the canvassing board, said he is disturbed by the way the plaintiffs are portraying the board's attempts to protect voter's rights and ensure the accuracy of the list.

Even though the board continues to hear complaints about the accuracy of the list, Solomon said, the plaintiffs have failed to provide evidence that the list is flawed. Several of them attended Tuesday's certification hearing but none presented evidence to back of their claimes, he said.

"None of them not a one of them brought any evidence to the table even after we gave them ample opportunity," Solomon said.

Solomon said the board, which faced a deadline to certify the list on Tuesday, needs such evidence before it can strike any name from the list. By law, local authorities must wait two presidential elections before they can strike inactive voters from the roster.

The plaintiffs say that they brought a number of irregularities to the board's attention. They said the problems, which they believe exist throughout Rhode Island, surfaced after Coogan and Cusack sent mailings to all city voters and had hundreds of them returned marked undeliverable by the post office.

Solomon questioned why the plaintiffs failed to bring undeliverable mail to the hearing as evidence.

Earlier this month, the group noted the discovery of inaccurate addresses for two registered voters who voted in last month's primary election. One lives in Bristol but claimed residency at his auto body shopin East Providence. Another lives in Seekonk but claimed residency at the Dunkin' Donuts he owns in East Providence.

Robinson said both people since re-registered in the communities in which they live. However, after reviewing the roster, the plaintiffs allegedly found two other registered voters who list the Dunkin' Donuts as their home address.

"With the technology that exists today, we don't understand why this hasn't been corrected," Monroe said.

A judge is expected to hear preliminary arguments in the case today.