Finnegan concedes Uxbridge election
By Sara Withee / News Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 13, 2004

UXBRIDGE Donald Sawyer's man seat is now certain after former Selectman Robert Finnegan decided over the weekend to his lawsuit contesting April's election and the subsequent recounts.

     In a letter faxed Saturday to Town Manager Allan Klepper, Finnegan said he will not pursue the case following Judge Thomas P. Billings' recent ruling in Worcester Superior Court denying his bid for a new men election.

     Finnegan said in the letter he has directed his attorney, William McDermott Jr. of West Roxbury, to obtain the town's approval to dismiss the case with prejudice, meaning it cannot return to court.

     Yesterday, Finnegan, an attorney himself, said while he disagreed with portions of Billings' ruling, he decided not to go forward partly because he did not believe an appeal had a strong likelihood of success.

     He also said returning to his man seat was secondary to his ultimate goal of cleaning up Uxbridge elections.

     "My goal with this in the beginning was really trying to focus and refocus credibility on the election process in town...This was less about getting me back in office and more about that," Finnegan said. "It just didn't work out. The judge made his decision and ruled and I'm going to respect that."

     Finnegan finished the April 13 election three votes over Sawyer to win a second term, but Sawyer took over the contested seat after the April 26 recount he petitioned put him five votes ahead of Finnegan.

     The real surprise came from the 171 additional votes the hand recount distributed among all four candidates in the race for two men seats.

     A few days later, the town learned the problem stemmed from three of its four Accu-Vote voting machines being non-Lucid models that were purchased in 1995. The machines failed to count some of the absentee ballot votes because they were filled out with the wrong type of writing instrument.

     Finnegan filed his lawsuit May 19, a move that triggered a second recount on June 3 that took more than 10 hours.

     Sawyer again came out of the second recount five votes over Finnegan, but the overall number of votes cast in the election changed for the third time.

     Finnegan returned to court to seek a new election based on the changing number of votes and other discrepancies uncovered by the second recount. Billings denied the request, saying there were not enough questionable votes to justify a new election.

     Sawyer said yesterday he had not spoken to Finnegan directly, but believes residents should thank him for his dedicated service, regardless of whether they agree with his political views.

     As for Finnegan's decision, Sawyer called it a wise move that will help the Board of Selectmen move forward with its work.

     "It's certainly undermined some of the day-to-day decision-making process, with the cloud hanging over my head," Sawyer said about Finnegan's lawsuit. "It's impeded my abilities to be a man at 100 percent."

     Sawyer, who runs a technology firm, said he continues to be surprised at how the recount he sought changed the election and what it revealed about the town's polling.

     "It was quite eye-opening to me, the intricacies involved in the entire election process," Sawyer said. "I've always been completely surprised by the machine programming. That never entered my mind when I called for the recount."

     To eliminate future problems, state Sen. Richard Moore, D-Uxbridge, announced last week that he helped secure $7,000 from Secretary of State William Galvin's office to upgrade the three voting machines that caused the problems.

     In a written statement faxed to the town Sunday, a day after submitting his initial announcement, Finnegan said the voting machines and investigations Galvin's office is conducting into the town's voting problems are two positives.

     "I am hopeful that with the expanded scope of the ongoing state investigation, the new voting machines, and the recent and future appointments to the Board of Registrars will continue the process set in motion by my actions," Finnegan wrote. "As always, time will tell."

     Sawyer, however, refers to the inquiries as separate matters which the state must start to resolve to "remove that doubt cloud" hanging over the town.

     The issues date back to spring 2003, when Galvin's elections division received letters from residents challenging the right of some voters at the May 2003 Town Meeting. It now also includes April's election along with cleanup of the town's active voting list.

     "Is it an ongoing indefinite investigation because there were letters written to Galvin's office?" Sawyer said. "It just needs to be resolved."