November 8, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
Ken Mee
November 8, 1996
Page 1
Ken Mee
42356 Greenbrier Park Drive
Fremont, CA 94538
Ron Carey Campaign
c/o Nathaniel K. Charny
Cohen, Weiss & Simon
330 W. 42nd Street
New York, NY 10036
Lou Marini, President
Teamsters Local Union 85
2660 Newhall Street, Suite 205
San Francisco, CA 94124
Bradley T. Raymond
Finkel, Whitefield, Selik, Raymond,
Ferrara & Feldman, P.C.
32300 Northwestern Highway, Suite 200
Farmington Hills, MI 48334
Ken Mee
November 8, 1996
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case No. P-1131-LU85-CSF
Gentlemen:
Ken Mee, a member of Local Union 287 and a candidate for Western Region vice president, filed a pre-election protest pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 1995-1996 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) alleging that on October 4, 1996, Local Union 85 President Lou Marini held a formal reception for general president candidate James P. Hoffa at the Local Union 85 hall.
Mr. Hoffa replies that there was no formal reception. Mr. Hoffa met a few of his supporters at the local union hall, after the local union had closed for the weekend, in order to go campaign in the local union area together. Prior to their leaving the local union hall, they had some sandwiches and sodas, which were purchased by one of Mr. Hoffa’s supporters.
Regional Coordinator Matthew D. Ross investigated this protest.
Ken Mee
November 8, 1996
Page 1
Shortly after this protest was docketed by the Election Office, the Regional Coordinator spoke with Mr. Mee by telephone. During this conversation, Mr. Mee indicated that he did not wish to pursue the protest. On October 25, 1996, the Regional Coordinator sent Mr. Mee a letter via overnight mail stating that he should call the Regional Coordinator over the weekend, or by the afternoon of Monday, October 28, 1996, to indicate whether he wanted to drop the protest or pursue it. Mr. Mee did not respond to this letter and has not supplied any evidence to support his protest.
Article XIV, Section 1 of the Rules places the burden on the protester “to present evidence that a violation has occurred.” Further, the Election Appeals Master has stated that the protester bears the initial burden of proof to offer evidence substantiating the allegations. In Re: Chentnik, 95 - Elec. App. - 52 (KC) (January 10, 1996). The protester has failed to meet this burden.
Accordingly, the protest is DENIED.
Any interested party not satisfied with this determination may request a hearing before the Election Appeals Master within one day of receipt of this letter. The parties are reminded that, absent extraordinary circumstances, no party may rely upon evidence that was not presented to the Office of the Election Officer in any such appeal. Requests for a hearing shall be made in writing and shall be served on:
Kenneth Conboy, Esq.
Latham & Watkins
885 Third Avenue, Suite 1000
New York, NY 10022
Fax (212) 751-4864
Copies of the request for hearing must be served on the parties listed above as well as upon the Election Officer, 400 N. Capitol Street, Suite 855, Washington, DC 20001, Facsimile
(202) 624-3525. A copy of the protest must accompany the request for a hearing.
Sincerely,
Barbara Zack Quindel
Election Officer
cc: Kenneth Conboy, Election Appeals Master
Matthew D. Ross, Regional Coordinator