A happy Helen Berg at Select Board meeting 3/31
At tonight's Select Board meeting during the 6:30 p.m. "public comment" period former (or maybe not) Select Board candidate Helen Berg confirmed she has contacted the ACLU and Attorney General regarding her complaint about ballot placement.
Berg, who came in a distant 3rd at the annual Town Election last week, complained to town officials when her name appeared 3rd of the 4 Select Board candidates. Berg insisted she should be 1st as state statute says non-incumbents (in this case all four candidates) should be placed on the ballot alphabetically.
Town officials did throw out those ballots and arranged a do-over drawing of names because the original meeting of the Board of Registrars was not properly posted. But they continued to use the traditional method of randomly drawing names from a hat rather than using the state method, which would have place Berg in the top position.
Either way the two top vote getters enjoyed a more than four-to-one margin of victory. Berg will have a hard time convincing a judge that placement on the ballot alone cause such a dramatic thrashing. Although, judges are known to be sticklers when it comes to rule of law.
Another town election would cost taxpayers $12,000.
If you like this story help make this happen:
17 comments:
Ice berg love it!
I don't know her, but she should be ashamed. Calling for a new election when she lost by a landslide for being in 3rd position when the 4th position candidate got a much higher vote count. If this is the character we can expect her to guide the town with if she was on SC, then it is no wonder people did not vote for her.
Ms. Berg, please go back to whatever life you have and leave the Amherst tax payers in peace. We really don't need to waste another 12K on your whims.
What a self entitled piece of trash, people like this disgust me, take your hippie "I am the most important person ever" attitude and go buy your own island if you want to live a fantasy
I would love to know what these people would do if they had to work and what we could accomplish if energy was used in constructive manners
I think as consciencious and compassionate citizens, I think we should do the right thing - start an indiegogo campaign to fund a mental health evaluation of this crackpot Berg.
If the process is there for her to appeal the election and push another one, then she has the right to do so.
If you feel that she should not have such a right, and specifically that others should not have this right in the future, change the system she is using, don't blame her.
If it was really about saving $12k, there are countless things Amherst could do differently.
Only weak citizens need strong leaders.
Yokal (a local, I presume). Berg certianly does have the right to contest the election. What people, myself included, are railing against is that there is no discernable gain in her doing so. If she truly thinks she did not win the election because of the placement of her name, she is sorely mistaken. I expect she would garner LESS votes in a second election.
If Ms. Berg was truly committed to the public good, she would continue (start?) her efforts in other capacities and perhaps run again in the future. She's basically sabatoging any ability she has to contribute in a positive way, and dragging the town along with her due to some technicality. It's a selfish move, no two ways about it. To act this was and allege that the town acted unfairly against her shows her true colors, if you ask me. Borderline conspiracy theorist.
Two words: SORE LOSER.
Anon 9:52,
There are many things that we have the right to do as a society. Many of these rights are there to protect us in times of need or corruption. These rights should not be taken lightly as Ms. Berg is doing. That is clearly wrong. If she had lost by 50 votes or so then she might have some basis for her complaint. This right was not put in place so the looser by a landslide could have a do over. Mistreating our rights is disrespectful.
If you want to get technical, Ms. Berg's address in the Town Voting List, available at the Town Clerk's Office, is "138 Sunderland Road", which happens to be the Amherst Survival Center, not zoned for residence. Before we go through a Special Election, perhaps she should establish her residence.
On the town ballot it was a North Pleasant Street apartment.
C'mon, Helen, we know you read this blog. What is your position? Here is your platform, now please explain yourself.
Blame someone else when things don't go your way.
Although I don't agree with her, I can't help but enjoy and lament the irony that Ms. Berg's efforts point out. Like so many other situations, Amherst put itself in this position by doing things it's own way.
I could imagine someone mounting a successful campaign for a Select Board position on the sole platform of working to fix all the legal vulnerabilities this town has.
Berg could be the proverbial canary in the coal mine (fossil fuel reference fully intended).
Ms. Berg is sound and fury signifying nothing.
I think she's right -- if four UM students ignore what they think is a stupid law and have a loud party, they pay the town $1,200. If the town ignores what it considers a stupid law, it also pays $1,200.
Either we establish a "it's a stupid law and you can ignore it" rule, or when the town gets tagged, it pays.
Actually elections cost $12,000.
That's twelve thousand, not twelve hundred.
Well, maybe bungling an election is ten times stupider than having a loud party. There's one way for the town to avoid this in the future: follow the clearly stated election laws the first time..
Yes,we all know that in Amherst it is the people that are "important" that get to say and do what they want. Woman has a right to contest,to speak out,whatever. I am guessing that many of you (us) were the hippies that you are railing against 40 plus years ago. Remember,you are the "Man" now,remember the one you railed against so many years ago?
Post a Comment