GOP claims Holmes ineligble for office

The Republicans call on the newly re-elected Democratic councilman to resign from office, claiming his candidacy violated the federal Hatch Act.

By:Lea Kahn Staff Writer
Despite Councilman Mark Holmes re-election to Township Council on Tuesday, the Mercer County Republican Committee is sticking to its claim that Mr. Holmes candidacy violates the federal Hatch Act.
   The Mercer County Republican Committee has asked federal officials to determine whether Mr. Holmes is in violation of the Hatch Act. It has asked the U.S. attorneys office and the U.S. Office of Special Counsel to look into the matter.
   The Hatch Act prohibits employees of agencies that receive federal funds from seeking public office in elections where candidates run as Democrats or Republicans. If an elected official takes a job in an agency that receives federal funds, the law allows the elected official to complete his or her term of office — but that person may not seek re-election in a partisan election.
   Mr. Holmes was named executive director of the Housing Authority of East Orange in 2003, which receives federal funds. He was elected to Township Council in 1997 and re-elected in 2001 as a Republican. He switched to the Democratic Party in 2002.
   Mercer County Republican Committee Chairman John Hansbury filed a complaint alleging a violation of federal law with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel on Monday. The OSC investigates possible violations of the Hatch Act and, where warranted, prosecutes cases before the Merit Systems Protection Board, according to a document on the OSCs Web site.
   One possible sanction for violating the Hatch Act is to require the employer to forfeit a portion of the federal assistance equal to two years salary of the employee, according to the OSCs Web site. The offending employee also could resign from elective office.
   Mr. Hansbury also has asked the U.S. attorney generals office to investigate the Housing Authority of East Orange and Mr. Holmes, its executive director, to determine whether Mr. Holmes and the Housing Authority have violated federal law.
   Michael Drewniak, a spokesman for the U.S. attorney generals office, said Wednesday that the office receives many letters from the public, which are then reviewed. The only time the public would learn of an investigation is when and if criminal charges are filed, he said.
   Repeated calls this week to the OSCs Hatch Act Unit in Washington, D.C., seeking comment on Mr. Holmes case have not been returned.
   Mr. Holmes denied violating the Hatch Act and decried the county Republican Committees tactics Tuesday. He said its a shame that the Mercer GOP is attacking him and his family with the complaint about the federal job.
   Mr. Holmes said he never felt the need to ask for legal advice on whether his position as executive director of the housing authority — which falls under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development — would be in conflict with his political activities.
   Mr. Holmes also said he had never received anything in writing from HUD that called for him to choose between work and politics. HUD officials knew he was serving on Township Council when he was hired for the East Orange job, he said.
   Most people who run into a conflict-of-interest situation are those who hold public office in the same town in which they work, Mr. Holmes said. He noted that he works in East Orange, which is located in Essex County, and holds political office in Lawrence, which is in Mercer County.
   Wednesday afternoon, Mr. Hansbury said it is up to Mr. Holmes to decide whether he wants to follow federal law.
   As far as I see, the ball is in Marks court, he said. The only decision he has is to step aside, according to federal law. He was in violation of the Hatch Act while he was a candidate. Our position is, he was illegally on the ballot. We are most likely going to call for a special election.
   Mr. Hansbury said the county Republican Committee would argue that a special election is needed because of Mr. Holmes illegal candidacy. The voters were not given a choice, he said.
   But Peter Aseltine, a spokesman for the state attorney generals office, said a special election would not be warranted. Special elections are reserved for instances when a mayor resigns or dies while in office, he said.
   If Mr. Holmes were to step aside, it would be up to the Lawrence Township Democratic Committee to name three candidates and present those names to Township Council. One of the three candidates would be chosen to fill the vacancy until the next general election in November 2006, he said.