"Gus" still sheriff

By Andrew Powell

Late last week, a panel of appellate court judges affirmed Gus Skinner’s status as Sheriff of McCreary County.
Affirmation of the appellate order was posted on the court’s state website and Darrell Saunders, Skinner’s attorney, notified him of the decision early Friday morning. Skinner said, in a noon press release, just a few hours of hearing the news, the citizens “can rest assured that today they have a sheriff.”

Appellate Judge’s Acree and Nickell and Senior Judge Paisley officially rendered their opinion at 10 a.m. on April 20, exactly three months after Circuit Court Judge David Tapp first ruled that 57 first-name only votes for Skinner should be counted and that he should be sheriff. The Appellate Court upheld Tapp’s ruling citing, as he did three months ago, that the intent behind the write-in votes was of the up most importance and the intent to vote for Gus Skinner was clear.

“We agree that it would have been better if all voters had properly written ‘Gus Skinner’ in casting their write-in votes. But, in the context of this election, the intention of the voters writing ‘Gus’ is clearly expressed and their votes must be counted for Skinner,” wrote Paisley in the opinion.

“Today, a second court has considered the votes cast in the November Election for Sheriff of McCreary County and determined that the voter’s choice for Sheriff is Gus Skinner and that these votes are valid,” Skinner’s press release last Friday says.

At the heart of the case is the matter of Skinner campaigning on the basis that voters could write only his first name. Skinner was initially told this method of voting would be qualified, but was later informed the opposite after McCreary County Court Clerk Jo Kidd discussed the issue with state election officials.

As Judge Tapp declared during circuit proceedings, “the information did not reach all of Skinner’s supporters,” the appellate opinion states. During circuit proceedings, all three attorneys involved in the case; Saunders, Dan Thompson, attorney for Randy Waters, and Marcus Vanover, attorney for the McCreary County Board of Elections, provided a written stipulation that those 57 first name votes were intended votes for Gus Skinner for sheriff.

“The circuit court applied the principles of McIntosh v. Helton to find that the voters’ clear expression of intent was adequate under KRS 117.265 and that the votes cast using Skinner’s first name should be counted for him,” the appellate order states. The appellate judges further argued that the action for recount, which Thompson argued in Waters’ appeal should have been filed by Skinner, was not necessary since the attorneys stipulated those 57 votes were for Skinner. Skinner’s argument about procedural conduct during the recanvass was denied as moot by the Appellate Court as well.

The legality of those 57 votes is what truly is at issue the judges said.
“The statute requires only that the vote is cast ‘by writing the name of his choice’ in the appropriate place on the machine or the absentee ballot,” the appellate order states, thus affirming Judge Tapp’s opinion that regulations on write-in votes are vague. “There is no question that 57 of Skinner’s supporters attempted to comply with the statute by the use of Skinner’s first name.”

The judges added that the issue was not made more complex by allegations that voters “were disqualified or declared ineligible to vote or that any voter’s effort was tainted by any hint of corruption or impropriety.”

“For over five months now the citizens have called the Sheriff’s Department daily asking who the sheriff was today. Uncertainty about who is leader of the only local law enforcement agency in McCreary County has taken a toll on its citizens,” Skinner said last week. “Today, they can rest assured that they have a sheriff. I welcome the opportunity to run against Mr. Waters should he choose to seek election as sheriff in 2010. At that time, I promise the people of McCreary County that my name will appear on the ballot.”

The Voice attempted to contact Randy Waters this week about the issue, but was unable to reach him. Reportedly, Waters will seek the office again in 2010 and has decided not to further pursue this case or his re-establishment as sheriff. The Voice was unable to verify this with Waters.