Advertisement
Holy Week resources and reflections

New procedures considered for stated clerk elections

Last summer's stated clerk election at the 2004 General Assembly was fair and in compliance with the assembly's Standing Rules. But such elections could be even more transparent if new guidelines were to be implemented.

Those findings were presented and discussed during a meeting of the Committee on the Office of the General Assembly (COGA) March 30 in Louisville. A COGA subcommittee, the State Clerk Election Review Committee (SCERC), reported its preliminary findings March 30. The finding that the stated clerk election was valid was approved by COGA to be forwarded to the General Assembly Council (GAC), which also is meeting in Kentucky through April 2.

LOUISVILLE — Last summer’s stated clerk election at the 2004 General Assembly was fair and in compliance with the assembly’s Standing Rules. But such elections could be even more transparent if new guidelines were to be implemented.

Those findings were presented and discussed during a meeting of the Committee on the Office of the General Assembly (COGA) March 30 in Louisville. A COGA subcommittee, the State Clerk Election Review Committee (SCERC), reported its preliminary findings March 30. The finding that the stated clerk election was valid was approved by COGA to be forwarded to the General Assembly Council (GAC), which also is meeting in Kentucky through April 2. Specific recommendations for future elections will be presented for COGA action at its next meeting in September.

Last election

The subcommittee reviewed all correspondence to and from the Office of the General Assembly related to the stated clerk election, and reviewed a videotape of the actual proceeding. The inquiry was initiated after complaints were raised at the assembly last summer in Richmond about whether the stated clerk’s election had been fair, or whether supporters of the winning candidate, Clifton Kirkpatrick, might have violated the rules.

The subcommittee sent a questionnaire to a sampling of more than 100 commissioners from the last assembly, and to all four state clerk candidates, asking what, if anything, they thought might be done differently. Three candidates and 38 commissioners responded.

The election was reviewed because perceptions of unfairness surfaced, particularly that Kirkpatrick’s supporters may have prepared a list of possible questions to ask during a public question-and-answer session, and that that may have given him an unfair advantage.

There was at least one list of questions, but they were general and open-ended, and copies were available to anyone who requested them, according to the SCERC report.

Another complaint was that anonymous papers with negative opinions about some stated clerk candidates were posted in commissioners’ mailboxes. Committee members decried the use of secular political practices by those with a candidate to promote. “We hope the candidates take heed that this is not acceptable to the assembly, but there is no way to move against it,” said John C. “Jack” Baugh, SCERC chairman.

The subcommittee’s conclusion: under standing rules, anyone can put information into the boxes. It is left up to the commissioners to evaluate such reading material.

Evaluation, Nomination

SCERC members and their COGA colleagues discussed at some length the dual responsibilities of evaluating a standing stated clerk while almost simultaneously vetting candidates for the nomination process.

Steve Grace, moderator of COGA, described the process as it was followed last year. Notices were given to church press to give potential candidates for stated clerk the information they need about the process. The committee received the papers as filed, and did a preliminary checking of references; they did not interview the candidates.

They also did an end-of-term evaluation of Kirkpatrick, the incumbent stated clerk.
Is the process different if there is an incumbent? “It should be the same every four years, like zero-based funding,” said Baugh. “The only way to be fair is to make the playing field even.”

But committee members acknowledged that an incumbency affects a totally level field. “If the same committee does a review of the incumbent and checks nominees, the degree of review is greater than the other nominees receive,” said Grace.

Preliminary conclusion: Any end-of-term review of an incumbent state clerk should be separated from the nominee processing.

Before the COGA meeting in September, the SCERC will prepare recommendations for “campaign” procedures for the stated clerk elections. They will address such issues as campaign spending limits, restrictions on mailings and distribution of materials; and developing information packets on each candidate.

Members of the Stated Clerk Election Review Committee in addition to Baugh, are Helen Cochrane, Barbara Corwin and John Purcell.

The next stated clerk election is scheduled for 2008.

LATEST STORIES

Advertisement