IN RE: TOM LEEDHAM RANK AND FILE POWER SLATE,
Protest Decision 2001 EAD 544
Issued: November 8, 2001
OEA Case No. PR101712NA
The Tom Leedham Rank and File Power slate ("Leedham slate") filed a pre-election protest pursuant to Article XIII, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 2000-2001 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election ("Rules") against the Hoffa Unity slate ("Hoffa slate"). The protest alleges the Hoffa slate plans to spend more money than it has or anticipates receiving, in violation of the Rules.
Election Administrator representative Jeffrey Ellison investigated the protest.
Findings of Fact and Analysis
The Hoffa slate CCER for reporting period 5 shows a bank balance of $757,166.30. Its Addendum #2, projecting the anticipated contributions and expenditure for the balance of the electoral period commencing September 1, shows anticipated contributions of $606,500 and anticipated expenditures of $1,559,500. Were all the anticipated contributions realized and the budgeted expenditures made, the Hoffa slate would record a deficit of $195,833.70. The protestor urges that such deficit spending violates the Rules.
The Hoffa slate filed an amended budget October 25. That budget projects anticipated contributions of $460,500 and expenditures of $1,162,500 for the same period covered by the first budget. If actual contributions received and expenditures made corresponded with the budget's projection for those categories, the Hoffa slate would complete the electoral period with a surplus of $55,166.30.
Under these circumstances, the issue of whether deficit spending violates the Rules is not presented. The Hoffa slate's amended budget demonstrates that its projected expenditures do not exceed the combination of cash on hand and anticipated contributions.
Accordingly, we DENY this protest.[1]
Any interested party not satisfied with this determination may request a hearing before the Election Appeals Master within two (2) working days of receipt of this decision. The parties are reminded that, absent extraordinary circumstances, no party may rely upon evidence that was not presented to the Office of the Election Administrator in any such appeal. Requests for a hearing shall be made in writing, shall specify the basis for the appeal, and shall be served upon:
Kenneth Conboy
Election Appeals Master
Latham & Watkins
Suite 1000
885 Third Avenue
New York, New York 10022
Fax: 212-751-4864
Copies of the request for hearing must be served upon all other parties, as well as upon the Election Administrator for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 727 15th Street NW, Tenth Floor, Washington, DC 20005 (facsimile: 202-454-1501), all within the time prescribed above. A copy of the protest must accompany the request for hearing.
William A. Wertheimer, Jr.
William A. Wertheimer, Jr.
Election Administrator
cc: Kenneth Conboy
2001 EAD 544
DISTRIBUTION LIST VIA UPS NEXT DAY AIR:
Patrick Szymanski
IBT General Counsel
25 Louisiana Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20001
Bradley T. Raymond
Finkel, Whitefield, Selik,
Raymond, Ferrara & Feldman
32300 Northwestern Highway
Suite 200
Farmington Hills, MI 48334
J. Douglas Korney
Korney & Heldt
30700 Telegraph Road
Suite 1551
Bingham Farms, MI 48025
Barbara Harvey
3060 Penobscot Building
645 Griswold
Detroit, MI 48226
Betty Grdina
Yablonski, Both & Edelman
Suite 800
1140 Connecticut Ave. NW
Washington, D.C. 20036
Tom Leedham c/o Stefan Ostrach
110 Mayfair
Eugene, OR 97404
Todd Thompson
209 Pennsylvania Ave., SE
Washington, DC 20003
Matt Ginsburg
30 Third Avenue
Brooklyn, NY 11271
James L. Hicks, Jr., P.C.
Suite 1100
2777 N. Stemmons Freeway
Dallas, TX 75207
Jeffrey Ellison
65 Cadillac Square
Suite 3727
Detroit, MI 48226
[1] We do not address the propriety vel non of the projected revenues and expenditures stated in the slate's budget, since that question is not raised by the protest.