July 6, 2016
As you may know, the 4th District Court of Appeals reversed the trial judge’s ruling that only a current term of office would count against the two term limit, and that 4 term Concilman David Levy had been eligible to run. The 3 Judge panel sent the case back to Trial Judge Martin Colin for action.
Today, Judge Colin ruled on one of two issues – that David Levy should be removed from office.
The second question – as to how the seat will be filled will be decided in the near future.
Plaintiff Carl Wood, the only remaining candidate from the March election after Kevin Easton withdrew and David Levy has been ruled ineligible, argues that he should be seated immediately.
The City on the other hand, represented by Attorney Max Lohman, is arguing that a special election is now required, open to any and all candidates interested in running.
Judge Colin has asked that written arguments and precedents in case law be supplied on the second question by next week and he will decide it in an expedited manner.
Seating Mr. Woods now seems like the obvious course of action to us. It is true that none of the three candidates on the ballot received a majority of the votes, and the judge previously decided that votes for Kevin Easton (who had withdrawn) should be considered in the totals implying a runoff election was necessary. But the runoff would have been between Levy and Woods. Now, with Levy ineligible, there is only one candidate remaining – so he should be declared the winner, much as Maria Marino was declared the winner when Takeeta Pang withdrew.
The city though has a different view – they appear to be so opposed to seating Mr. Woods that they are willing to spend even more taxpayer money on a special election on top of what they have contributed to the legal fees incurred in support of David Levy. It is not clear to us why the city even has a dog in this fight. With term limits decisively affirmed, and Mr. Levy removed, what do they seek to achieve?