Politics & Government
Clerk Candidates Allowed to Continue
Two of the three Republicans trying to become Cobb's next clerk of Superior Court were given the unanimous go-ahead Monday from the Cobb Board of Elections, the Marietta Daily Journal reported.
Joan Davis and Rebecca Keaton are still contenders in Cobb's race for Superior Court clerk, the Marietta Daily Journal reports.
With one member absent, the Cobb Board of Elections voted 4-0 to allow them to stay in the Republican primary in the July 31 elections following separate challenges made last week, the newspaper says.
The challenge against Keaton—made by Marietta lawyer Michael Carvalho—alleged that Keaton qualified to run with the Cobb Republican party on May 24. Carvalho said that on the following day, Keaton filed paperwork claiming Jason Shepherd as her running mate, even though Cobb election rules say qualifying and turning in a name for running mate must happen on the same day.
Find out what's happening in Smyrna-Viningsfor free with the latest updates from Patch.
Then, Carvalho said, there were alterations on the form turned in by Keaton, including the whiting out of Shepherd's name and Kimberly Carroll listed as the new running mate.
The challenge against Davis was made by Barry J. Schwartz and his Marietta attorney, Alan Manheim. It said that Davis listed her running mate as current chief deputy clerk Elva Dornbusch, even though this wasn't approved by Dornbusch, the Marietta Daily Journal reported in a separate article.
Find out what's happening in Smyrna-Viningsfor free with the latest updates from Patch.
Another part of the challenge: Davis writing in that she's a lawyer on the qualifying paperwork in spite of being disbarred by the Supreme Court of Georgia, the newspaper adds.
Davis, Keaton and John Skelton complete the Republican field. There are no Democrats in the race, so it is likely the winning GOP candidate on July 31 will be the next Superior Court clerk.
One commenter said on West Cobb Patch, "This means one of only two possible things... (1) They made errors and will claim they didn't understand the forms or rules, which tells voters if they're not competent enough to understand simple election forms and rules; they don't possess enough intelligence for the job. OR (2) They did understand what was being asked of them and lied to make themselves look more favorable, which tells voters they don't possess enough integrity for the job. Either way I feel they should be disqualified... Whatever the reason for these 'mishaps', the election board should nip these two in the bud. Mistakes like this, at such an early stage, can only mean much larger problems down the road."
What do you think about Monday's vote by the Board of Elections? Tell us in the comments.
Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.
