Raw Footage: 2/23 Henderson Qualifies Grapski

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
645 views
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Mar 6, 2007

On Friday February 23 Charlie Grapski went to Alachua's City Hall to qualify to run for the City Commission.

Grapski had obtained a packet of information for qualifying candidates provided by City Clerk Clovis Watson.

The packet contained no instructions except for the City's ordinance controlling elections (O-11-03). The ordinance establishes that a candidate must complete two requirements to qualify: 1) Swear an oath before the Clerk that they have the two qualifications (a. they are a resident; and b) a qualified elector of Alachua); and 2) that they present a $25 Qualifying Fee or 25 signatures.

Deputy Clerk Alan Henderson, shown in this video, was entrusted again by the City to be the Supervisor of its elections.

Henderson is seen on the video stating that he was not sure what the requirements were. He then reads the ordinance. Afterward he indicates to Grapski that there is nothing more, once he presents the $25 Fee and a state mandated Election Assessment, to be qualified.

Grapski left that day with the impression that he had qualified.

That night WCJB TV-20 (ABC) announced that two candidates had qualified to challenge incumbents Jean Calderwood, the controversial mayor, and Bonnie Burgess. Grapski, they declared, had been determined by Henderson to have not qualified due to not signing a required document.

The next morning the Gainesville Sun reported that the City was going to hold that all three challengers failed to qualify based upon the same requirement.

The alleged requirement, Form 1, is not required under Florida Law to qualify for Alachua City Commission races.

Monday, February 26th, the City Commission and City Attorney Marian Rush (of the firm Rush and Glassman) declared that there was no need for an election as no one had qualified to challenge the incumbents.

The basis: Henderson's statements that the challengers failed to provide the necessary documents.

The problem: Not only is the document not required but Henderson clearly had not required it of these candidates or properly inform them of the necessity that he claimed for this document.

The evidence: View for yourself this video. Henderson clearly indicates to Grapski that he has met the requirements for qualifying before Grapski left.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

License:

Standard YouTube License

  • likes, 0 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (0)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
Loading...

Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more