Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
St. Joseph County election board denies challenge to Doug Chaffee’s school board candidacy
Summary
The St. Joseph County Election Board voted unanimously to deny a challenge to Doug Chaffee’s Penn-Harris-Madison School Board candidacy after hearing evidence alleging partisan campaign activity tied to a GOP booth; the board said its review is limited to ballot presentation under state law.
The St. Joseph County Election Board voted unanimously to deny a challenge filed by Ben Dallas to the candidacy of Doug Chaffee for the Penn-Harris-Madison School Board.
An unidentified presenter submitted new evidence, saying an email from the Saint Joseph County GOP showed a paid GOP campaign booth at the Osceola Music Festival that featured partisan signage, literature for Chaffee and a MAGA flag. The presenter told the board that photographs and the party email demonstrate Chaffee was “running a partisan campaign,” and cited Indiana Code 20-23-15-6, which governs nonpartisan school board elections. The presenter said, “He is running a partisan campaign,” and argued that conduct violated the code.
Board members repeatedly framed the issue as limited to how a candidate’s name and nickname appear on the ballot rather than broader campaign activity. Jay, a board member, said the board’s role is to ensure ballots remain nonpartisan and that campaign conduct outside the ballot is generally beyond its authority. Jay described consulting the state election commission for guidance on what is acceptable on a nonpartisan ballot and said the commission’s advice informed the board’s review.
Another board member stated that the statutory review is narrow and focuses on the forms filed and the way a name appears on the ballot, not on how candidates campaign in the field. That member moved “that the board deny the challenge filed by Ben Dallas to the candidacy of Doug Chaffee for the Penn Harris Madison School Board.” The motion was seconded and passed with unanimous voice votes.
The board did not order further investigation into the campaign activity presented. After the decision, the meeting opened for public comment. A member of the public asked how many people would be allowed in the building lobby during the upcoming election; the board did not announce a decision on that question during the meeting.
The meeting adjourned following the public-comment period.
