Information from the city attorney's office and county elections administrator seems to show that Moss is clean on those charges. But there are other serious questions that haven't been explained away -- including an election judge who was fired when officials found out she was a paid Moss campaign worker, and allegations that Moss' Òvoter developmentÓ workers went far beyond what is allowed in helping senior citizens fill out absentee ballots. It's no coincidence, his opponents say, that Moss' majorities in the last three elections have come, not from the folks who actually turned out on election day, but from absentee ballots, many of them filled out -- with help -- by elderly voters. Moss says he didn't know anything about any wrongdoing by his campaign workers, and that there's nothing wrong with going after senior citizens' or absentee voters' ballots. He says he's served his district well by bringing street improvements, housing, and economic development. But even setting aside the questions of electoral skullduggery, observers say Moss is facing a level of voter unrest unlike anything he's had to deal with before. It comes both from those whose issues are local to District 5, and those with broader concerns. And it's being led by groups whose members didn't really know much about one another -- until they looked around to figure out who else was doing the yelling at recent voter forums. The three general election candidates who failed to make the runoff -- Sharon Armstrong, Lyddia Sheppard-Antwine, and Rickie Clark -- along with community leaders like former district judge L. Clifford Davis, have thrown their support behind Donavan Wheatfall, the young minister who is Moss' opponent in the June 19 runoff. Davis, who also supported Moss' opponent in the commissioner's race, said Wheatfall's Òtraining and experience and his desire to serve the people of the communityÓ could help re-energize the East Side. The result has been not so much a movement for Wheatfall as it has been against Frank Moss -- and maybe against more than just Moss. ÒIt seems like little cells of discontent are popping up and people are clumping together,Ó said Wanda Conlin, a local newspaper publisher who has taken an activist role in trying to address a whole raft of Eastside problems. Conlin -- who doesn't live in District 5 -- said that based on what she's heard at numerous voter meetings around town in the last several months, she believes Fort Worth may be getting ready for bigger changes. ÒThey're not just talking about change in District 5, they're talking about change in the whole council,Ó she said. ÒTotal discontent is what we're hearing.Ó
William Richardson is 78, and his eyesight isn't what it used to be. A faithful voter, he now needs help to fill out his absentee applications and ballots. But he never again wants the kind of ÒhelpÓ he said he got before the May 15 special election in District 5. Before that election, he said, a woman whose name he doesn't remember came to his house to assist him with the ballot. ÒShe was mostly filling it out,Ó Richardson said. ÒI wrote my name down. I was told not to say anything about it.Ó Over and over, he said, the woman told him, ÒWell, what about Frank Moss? Give him another chance.Ó The woman Òkept on and kept on, so I just gave upÓ and marked the ballot for Moss, he said. But the incident aggravated him. In the future, he said, he will get only family members to help him, because he doesn't want to be told how to vote. For the District 5 runoff, he has already marked his ballot and sealed it up, so nobody can influence him. ÒI'm a senior citizen, and I want to vote for who I want to vote for,Ó he said. ÒI know what happened and nobody's going to do it again.Ó According to the Texas election code, it is a Class A misdemeanor for a person who is assisting a voter to Òsuggest by word, sign or gesture how the voter should vote.Ó Robert Parten, county elections administrator, said that, in practice, it's not so clear-cut. ÒThere should never be a suggestion made by a worker to someone they're assisting as to who [the correct candidate] should be,Ó he said. If voters will write to him Òand tell me they were intimidated or required or forced to vote for someone other than who they wanted to vote for, I will personally see that it gets to the district attorney's office,Ó he said. ÒBut just because someone suggests a name does not make it illegal.Ó The Rev. Wendel ÒBuckÓ Cass, a longtime Eastside activist who is supporting Wheatfall, said he believes that Moss' campaign workers routinely engage in such badgering. He named one longtime campaign worker as someone who had Ògone a little bit overboard.Ó Contacted by Fort Worth Weekly, the campaign worker vehemently denied trying to influence any voter and threatened to sue for slander anyone who said she had. ÒI wouldn't tell anyone how to vote,Ó she said, then added, ÒIf anyone asks me who I'm going to vote for, I can tell them ... if I want to.Ó ÒI don't know anything about that,Ó Moss said, in response to Richardson's allegations. He did say that the woman in question worked on his phone bank and did some face-to-face Òvoter developmentÓ work. He also said she had done similar campaign work in the past for Democratic candidates such as Mike Moncrief, Martin Frost, and Jim Wright. Moss said that many absentee voters ask which candidate the campaign workers themselves are going to vote for. And, he said, he's heard similar allegations, of voters being pressured by operatives whom he believes may be working for Wheatfall. Dr. Armentha Hill, a Moss supporter who was appointed to the Fort Worth Commission for Women, said she has never seen any of his campaign workers doing anything improper. On election day, she said, his volunteers always remain outside the designated polling place limits when handing out campaign cards. However, there's no disagreement about another election impropriety that Moss' opponents have complained about. Just before the May 15 election, Parten's office learned that one of Moss' paid campaign workers, Mary Criss, was also signed up to be an election judge. When his office workers saw Criss' name on Moss' campaign finance reports (she was paid $250 for voter development), Parten said he called city officials and recommended that she be removed from the judge's position. ÒWe suggested it to them just to keep out improprieties,Ó Parten said. ÒI think they agreed with that and decided to remove her.Ó On a KHVN Heaven 97 radio program before the special election, Moss said he knew that Criss was both on his campaign payroll and signed up as an election judge. He admitted that he had paid Criss Òfor some services that she provided for meÓ but said he not intend to influence her work as an election judge. ÒI don't operate on that basis of favoritism,Ó he said. Criss said that even though she was paid by Moss, she was not asking voters to support Moss or anyone else. ÒWhat did I do? I did a little telephone calling. I wasn't telling anyone who to vote for; I was just telling people to please vote,Ó she said. ÒI figured that with the November election we need everybody to vote, and it doesn't mean saying 'who are you voting for,' just 'please vote.'Ó In an interview last week, Moss said that he is being criticized, in part, because he duly reported paying Criss, while some other candidates did not report payments made to their campaign workers. When Criss' standing as an election judge was questioned, he said, Òthey got rid of her and got three old white ladies and it was a nightmare.Ó
|
That Storm Was an SUV of an SOB
- - - - - - - - - - -
From the Week of June 9
- - - - - - - - - - -
Should scarce public resources go to the world's richest retailer? By David Sirota, Christy Harvey, and Judd Legum
|
