Last week I had a chat with Keene’s city clerks Patti Little, Bill Dow, and the assistant city attorney about their challenge to my voter’s registration. The episode, some highlights of which you can see in the Ridley Report below, turned into a perfect example of how even if you think you know what their rules say, it’s only their interpretation that matters.
I filed for my candidacy for mayor as Ian “Nobody” Bernard. That’s my slave name with a nickname of “Nobody” added to the middle. 
The publicly announced purpose of this campaign was to give voters the first opportunity ever to actually choose Nobody, rather than the lesser of two evils. (As I would not take the oath of office or attend council meetings.) Clearly, the establishment did not appreciate this and immediately set to disqualifying me from the ballot. They decided on attacking my voter registration, which hadn’t seemed to be a problem before. The assistant city clerk Bill Dow, a very nice man, sent me the following letter and email:
It has been noticed that your voter registration record on file in the Keene City Clerk’s office indicates that your residence address is listed as 39 Central Square #313. It is our understanding that the residence address you provided on your voter registration form dated 11/28/2008 is not a legal domicile as defined by NH Statute which states:
Mail boxes are insufficient for purposes of establishing domicile as defined by RSA 654:1,I, which defines domicile as “that one place where a person, more than any other place, has established a physical presence…” This definition is further clarified by RSA 654:7, the statutory Voter Registration Form, which states that “A domicile is that place, more than any other, where I sleep most nights of the year…”
NH Statute requires that a voter domicile affidavit be filled out when a voter’s legal domicile is in question by an election official. Please come to the Keene City Clerk’s Office and fill out a voter domicile affidavit, no later than Monday, September 07, 2009 or your name will be removed from the declarations of filings list for the 2009 Municipal Primary and the process for removing your name from the voter checklist will follow.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me at the Office of the City Clerk.
Sincerely,
William S. Dow
Records Manager/Deputy City Clerk
They sent along a “domicile affadavit”, but as I know government people like to request more information than they are required to by their rules, I decided to have a look at their statutes to see what should have been on the form. Indeed there were some differences. I printed out the domicile affadavit from their own website, but did not fill in the street on which I live. It was my understanding that anyone who lives in NH can vote so long as they affirm they live in a certain geopolitically designated physical area. (In order to be a candidate in a municipal election in Keene, one must need only be a registered voter.) In this case, I was willing to affirm that I live within the designation known as “Ward 4” in Keene. Even though the clerk admitted that a homeless man could write in a general location and that would be accepted, she insisted I be treated differently and demanded my home address.
Of course, their own definition of domicile in 654:7 says, “A domicile is that place, more than any other, where I sleep most nights of the year, or to which I intend to return after a temporary absence. As you can see, Bill Dow did not cite the alternative definition, nor did the city attorney accept it. He claims the definition of domicile is actually in 654:1:
An inhabitant’s domicile for voting purposes is that one place where a person, more than any other place, has established a physical presence and manifests an intent to maintain a single continuous presence for domestic, social, and civil purposes relevant to participating in democratic self-government.
To me, it seems “Ward 4” should be sufficient to meet that definition. It is a “place” wherein I’ve established a presence. Since a homeless person’s domicile can be a geographic area, it’s clear I’m being discriminated against and targeted.
It’s no secret where I live but I did not want to obey her arbitrary demand for this information. Upon request, she informed me that it was only the incumbent Dale Pregent and I who were vying for the mayoral seat. I said it’d be a shame for him to be unopposed, and she claimed to agree, but she sure did everything she could to prevent Nobody from offering some competition. As you’ll see in the video, I made the offer to give her the info she wanted if she’d affirm they will allow my nickname of “Nobody” on the ballot. (Here in Keene it’s common to see nicknames in municipal elections.) She didn’t want to answer the question, but I pressed on and got her to admit that they would not allow the nickname of “Nobody”. The attorney claimed I’d need the nickname for five years and when asked what if I wait five years, they claimed they’d still disqualify it as a “slogan”.
I refused to assent, they refused to accept my domicile affadavit, and Patti claimed they’d be disqualifying me from the ballot and begin the “process” of un-registering me to vote. They also said they’d be targeting anyone with a voter’s registration located at the UPS Store on Central Sq.
Did I really expect them to allow “Nobody” on the ballot? Not really – then there’d be a real chance Nobody could win!
So, should I launch a write-in campaign? Patti admitted that it would take some time for their “process” of removing me from the voter rolls, so by the time of the primary, I’d likely still be listed. (Patti’s letter to me notifying of my removal from the primary ballot informed me that the “checklist supervisors” would give me the “opportunity to qualify your domicile” prior to my removal from the voter rolls, so who knows how long this removal process will take.) It only takes ten write-in votes at the primary to nominate someone. Since Pregent is unopposed, unless someone else gets more write-ins than I, that should qualify me to run against him in the general election. Of course, that presumes they don’t find some other way to disallow me. (We’d probably need to send people to watch the vote counting to be sure they weren’t ignoring the write-ins.) Obviously they won’t allow the nickname, but perhaps I should just run as my slave name and hope people get the word that a vote for me is a vote for Nobody! What do you think? Please post your thoughts in the comments.
