Great Neck Park District: Judge 'not empowered' to toss election results

The Great Neck Park District has filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit of a former commissioner candidate, saying a state Supreme Court judge has no standing to interfere with the results of a December district election the litigant lost.

The motion was in response to a lawsuit Gordon Charlop filed last month seeking to throw out the Dec. 12 victory of his incumbent opponent, Tina Stellato, claiming the election was “unfair,” “biased” and involved “illegal” absentee ballot procedures.

“The court is not empowered to set aside the election or to order a new election on the basis of a challenge initiated by the petitioner,” park district attorney Andrew Luskin wrote in a motion last week.

The 23-page filing argued that since the election was certified and the victor assumed the seat, New York's attorney general would be the proper party to challenge an “office holder’s title” through a “quo warranto” action.

"We and our client are confident that the recent election was lawful and proper," Luskin said in a statement Tuesday.

Charlop said he filed the suit before his opponent was sworn in and called the motion to dismiss an attempt to avoid scrutiny and “to obstruct any effort from someone from the outside taking a look at what happens.”

Christopher Prior, general counsel for the park district, said in an affidavit attached to the dismissal motion that Charlop's claims are “demonstrably false.”

Prior added that the park district would “not respond at this time to specific substantive petition allegations” due to Charlop's failure to state a cause of action. The attorney also wrote that the results of the election were certified Dec. 12 and Stellato, 47, was sworn in Jan. 11.

The final vote tally was 1,580-710, according to the park district.

Charlop, 65, has said 861 of his opponent's votes came from absentee ballots and he received 69 such votes.

His suit alleges the absentee ballot application the park district provided to voters was improper for several reasons, making the use of absentee ballots “entirely suspect.”

Charlop said his campaign manager was improperly limited to obtaining 10 absentee ballot applications at a time and park district officials refused to accept an unspecified number of absentee ballots because of the size of the paper they were printed on.

The lawsuit from Charlop, who works as managing director at Manhattan investment firm Rosenblatt Securities, also alleged the district improperly used social media to endorse his opponent. The park district's motion didn't address that claim or any of his other claims.

One veteran election lawyer who previously examined Charlop's lawsuit at Newsday's request pointed to the social media allegation and the claim about limiting the distribution of absentee ballot applications as concerning.

Another such expert told Newsday if a government entity promotes a candidate on social media, then they're putting government resources in the race, which is improper.

While the park district’s motion asks the court to deny Charlop's lawsuit in its entirety, it also requests that portions of election materials be redacted to “preserve voter anonymity” if a judge grants Charlop a chance to inspect election items.

State Supreme Court Justice Eileen C. Daly-Sapraicone ordered the parties back before her on March 13.