STATE
O
F
CONNECTICUT
STATE
ELECTIONS
ENFORCEMENT
COMMISSION
I
n
the
Matter
o
f
a
Complaint
b
y
Thomas
Swarr
Ann
oshdigian,
artford
File
No.
018-014
AGREEMENT
CONTAINING
CONSENT
ORDER
This
Agreement,
b
y
and between
Giselle
Feliciano
and
Martin
A
.
ones,
o
f
he City
o
f
artford,
County
o
f
artford,
State
o
f
onnecticut
and
h
e
authorized
representative
o
f
h
e
State
Elections
Enforcement
Commission
s
entered
into
i
n
accordan
ce
with
Section
9-7b-54
o
f
he Regulations
o
f
Connecticut
State
Agencies
and
Section
4-177
c
)
f
h
e
General
tatutes
o
f
onnecticut.
I
n
accordance
herewith, he
parties
agree
that:
1
.
The
Complainants
allege that
the
Respondent
Absentee
Ballot
Moderator
and
Democratic
Registrar
o
f
oters
failed
t
o
allow
the
public to
observe
the
central
counting
o
f
bsentee
ballots
during
a
Democratic
arty
Committee
rimary.
2. General
Statutes
§
-147a
reads,
n
pertinent
part:
a)
A
t
any
election,
primary
o
r
referendum
all
absentee
ballots
shall
b
e
counted
i
n
the
respective
polling
places
except
when
counted
a
t
a
central location.
Any
lection
official
serving
i
n
a
polling
place
m
a
y
observe
the
counting
o
f
bsentee
ballots
at that
polling
place.
b
)
t
any
lection,
primary
o
r
referendum,
l
l
absentee
ballots
may
e
counted
a
t
a
central
location
designated
b
y
the
registrars
o
f
oters in
writing to the
municipal
clerk
a
t
least
twenty
days
before the
election,
primary
r
referendum,
hich
ocation
shall
b
e
ublished
i
n
the
warning
for
the
election,
primary
or
referendum.
I
f
unaffiliated
electors
a
r
e
authorized
under
section
9-431
t
o
vote in the
primary
o
f
ither
o
f
w
o
parties,
absentee
ballots
may
o
t
b
e
counted
a
t
a
entral
location
unless
both
parties
decide
t
o
have
central
counting
and
designate
the
same
room
o
r
such
entral
counting.
I
f
such
designation
o
f
a
entral
location
has
been
made,
h
e
ballots
shall
not
be
counted
n
any
olling
place
b
u
t
all
absentee
ballots shall
be
separated,
counted,
tallied,
placed
i
n
depository
envelopes
and
returned
b
y
voting
district
Anv
member
o
f
the
public
may
bserve
the
counting
f
bsentee
ballots
a
t
such
central
location.
Emphasis
added.
3
.
General
Statutes
§
-148
reads,
i
n
pertinent
part:
The
appointment
o
f
absentee
ballot
counters
shall
b
e
made
b
y
t
h
e
registrars
o
f
oters.
The
residing
officer
for
the
purpose
o
f
eclaring
t
h
e
result
o
f
h
e
vote
o
f
h
e
whole
municipality
i
s
the
moderator.
Each
erson
appointed
o
count
bsentee
ballots
shall
articipate
i
n
a
raining ession
a
t
which
h
e
registrars
o
f
oters,
absentee
ballot
moderator
o
r
moderator
o
f
h
e
polling place,
a
s
the
case
may
be,
shall
review
and
study
t
h
e
absentee
counter s
manual
rovided
b
y
the Secretary
o
f
h
e
State
under
section
9-1 Oa.
Each
elector
s
o
appointed
shall
b
e
sworn
t
o
carry
o
u
t
faithfully
the
duties
o
his
o
c
e
and
not
o
attempt
o
ascertain
the
manner
i
n
which
any
absentee
elector
has
marked
his
absentee
ballot.
T
h
e
registrars
o
f
voters
shall ascertain
the
voting
district
i
n
which
each
absentee
elector
i
s
registered
and
shall
apportion the
envelopes
ccording
t
o
voting
districts
among
the
appointed
groups
o
f
lectors,
i
f
there
i
s
more
than
one
such
group,
i
n
such
manner
that
each
group
c
a
n
conveniently
count
h
e
votes
apportioned
t
o
i
t
Emphasis
added.)
Background
4
.
The
acts
o
f
his
Complaint
concern
the
observation
o
f
bsentee
ballot
counting
during
t
h
e
March
6
,
2018
Hartford
Democratic
Town
ommittee
Primary.
Complainant
Swarr
w
a
s
the
husband
o
f
hallenge
slate
candidate
Donna
Swarr.
Complainant
Goshdigian
was
a
candidate
o
n
h
e
same
late
a
s
Ms.
Swarr.
Allegation
Mr.
Swarr and
Ms.
Goshdigian
alleged
that
they
attempted
t
o
observe
the
central
counting
o
f
h
e
absentee
ballots
a
t
Hartford
City
Hall
b
y
Absentee
Ballot
Moderator
Martin
Allen
Jones.
The
Complainants
llege that at
approximately
1:30pm,
Respondent
Jones
asserted
that
Ms.
Goshdigian
could
not
b
e
i
n
the
room
and
that
all
others
needed
t
o
leave
a
s
well,
including
Mr.
ones.
The
Complainants
allege that
they
requested
proof
n writing that
they
were
not
ermitted
t
o
b
e
i
n
the
room
while
the
absentee
ballots
were
being
counted.
They
assert
that
Mr.
Jones
showed them
the
Moderator s
Guide
o
r
Polling
Places as
proof
o
f
i
s
assertion that
they
were
not
ermitted
t
o
b
e
there.
6
.
They
asserted that
Registrar
Gisele
Feliciano
intervened
and
asserted
that
Ms.
Goshdigian
could
not
bserve
because
she
was a
candidate
and
candidates
could not
b
e
within
a
olling
place
during the
hours
o
f
oting.
They
assert that
Town
lerk
John
Bazzano
was
called
down
and
asked
t
o
opine
whether
h
e
room
n
which
h
e
ABs
ere
being
counted
was a
poll
ing
place.
They
ssert
that
Mr.
azzano
opined
hat
t
was
o
t
.
7
.
They
sserted
that
upon
Mr.
azzano's
ntervention,
Respondent
eliciano
then
changed
tact
and
asserted
that
t
was
ithin
her
authority
t
o
remove
anyone
isrupting
the
counting
process.
They
ssert
that
Ms.
eliciano
contacted
the
police
and
had
them
oth
removed
from
h
e
room.
8
.
They
sserted
that
Donna
Swam
hen
called
the
Secretary
of
h
e
State's
office
and
spoke
with Attorney
Bernard
Liu,
who
onfirmed
hat
they
had
a
ight
t
o
observe
the
counting
of
the
absentee
ballots.
They
ssert
that
Ms.
eliciano
herself
spoke
with the
office
of
h
e
Secretary
of
h
e
State,
a
t
which
oint
she allowed
Mr.
Swam
o
observe,
but
o
t
M
s
.
Goshdigian,
he candidate.
9
.
Finally,
h
e
Complainants
sserted that
the
Respondents
were
both
angry
and
elligerent
with
them,
espite
Mr.
warr
emaining
largely
silent
and
Ms.
oshdigian
being
assertive
but
not
ggressive.
Investigation
10.
The
nvestigation
here
was
imited
a
s
the
Respondents
do
not
deny
h
e
gravamen
of
h
e
allegations
,
that
t
was
heir
understanding
that
the absentee
ballot
counting
location
was a
polling
place
and
hat
the
Complainants
were
o
t
permitted
t
o
observe
until
the intervention
of
h
e
Secretary
of
h
e
State's
office.
They
ispute
that
they
were
n
any
way
rude
r
aggressive
and
ssert
that
t
was
Ms.
oshdigian
who
was
eing
disruptive
and
ggressive.
Moreover,
hey
assert
that
Mr.
warr
was
ttempting
t
o
observe
from
directly
behind
h
e
counting,
which
hey
assert
could
have
isked
being
able to
see
how
oters
were
casting
their
ballots.
11.
The
olice report
of
fficer
Barrett,
he City
Hall's
assigned
police
officer
on
he date in
question,
argely
restated
the
Complainant's
allegations
here.
Analysis
12.
Liability
for
failing
t
o
allow
the
Complainants
ere,
both
of
hem,
o
observe
the
absentee
ballot
count
s
clear.
General
tatutes
§
-147a
b
)
s
very
clear
that
any
member
of
h
e
public,
without
exception,
may
bserve
the counting
of
h
e
absentee
ballots
a
t
a
entral
counting
location.
Indeed, as
i
f
his
was
not
lear
enough,
one
need
look
no
urther
than
t
h
e
prior
subsection,
which
ifferentiates
the
counting
of
allots
a
t
a
olling
place
—in w
hich
View on Scribd