Every election season, the challenges appear, picking out every conceivable error on political candidates’ paperwork—some glaring, some subtle—in an attempt to knock them off the ballot before a vote even occurs.
It’s not always evident who’s behind the challenges. But in court Friday morning, Alan Kennedy-Shaffer, a Democratic candidate for Harrisburg City Council, named who he believed was behind his: James Pianka, a long-time operator in city politics, though one who usually works behind the scenes.
Two petitioners sought to strike the nomination of Kennedy-Shaffer on claims that he notarized a portion of his own paperwork. One, by David Smith, of the 2600-block of Lexington Street, has since been withdrawn. The other, by Jan Prosseda, of the 2800-block of N. 2nd Street, was heard at Friday morning’s hearing.
Kennedy-Shaffer notarized the signatures of the people who circulated petitions on his behalf, allegedly a violation of state notary law, the challengers claimed.
There is nothing on the surface of either court challenge to indicate any connection to Pianka. Pianka, asked about the Prosseda challenge Thursday afternoon, distanced himself from it, though he would not explicitly deny involvement.
“Is my name on it?” he said, referring to the civil complaint, as he left a meeting at an office building uptown.
When Pianka was asked for an explicit denial, his son, James Matthew Pianka, who was with him, repeated his father’s question. “Is his name on it?” he said, as they walked towards their car.
But there are plenty of indications that the man whose name actually appears on the challenge isn’t behind it, either.
Reached by phone Thursday, Prosseda said he filed the petition “as a favor” for someone whose name he declined to mention.
Prosseda also said he was unaware of the scheduled hearing and did not appear in court Friday.
Timothy Brennan, Prosseda’s attorney, said he could not discuss conversations with his client. Asked about Pianka’s involvement, Brennan gave no comment, indicating only that Prosseda’s name was the one on the challenge.
Kennedy-Shaffer, an attorney and an employee at the state Department of Corrections, is one of 12 candidates who have thrown their hats in the ring for the four council seats up for grabs in this year’s election.
He believes Pianka filed the challenge in retaliation after the Dauphin County Democrats opted not to endorse any candidates in the council race.
Kennedy-Shaffer moved for an open primary at the committee’s March 14 meeting, cutting off an effort by Pianka to secure an endorsement for Brad Koplinski, Kennedy-Shaffer said.
Both Pianka and his son have circulated petitions for Koplinski, a current council member who failed in a recent bid for lieutenant governor.
But Alex Reber, the committee’s vice-chair, said he doubted the petition challenge had anything to do with the vote for an open primary, pointing out the committee has been opting not to endorse candidates in most city races for the past several years.
“I don’t think it was retaliation,” he said. “We’re happy there’s an open primary. We think it’s good for democracy.”
Of the 40 or so members from Harrisburg in attendance on March 14, two-thirds voted in favor of an open primary, said Rogette Harris, the committee chairwoman.
In Friday’s court hearing, before Judge Scott Evans, Kennedy-Shaffer’s attorney did not dispute that his client had notarized the petitions under question. He argued, however, that doing so was not a violation of the election code, and even if it was, it was an “amendable” error that should not result in removal from the ballot.
Brennan, representing Prosseda, argued to the contrary that Kennedy-Shaffer’s action showed “purposeful indifference” to what he should have known was a potential violation of the law.
As part of his case, Brennan brought testimony from Gerald Feaser, director of the county elections bureau, who said he had given general, non-legal advice to Kennedy-Shaffer and other potential candidates at a Feb. 9 informational meeting.
Feaser also had told Kennedy-Shaffer that notarizing his own paperwork was something he “wouldn’t advise,” Feaser testified, though he added that he was not an attorney and that he viewed his comments as “public relations” and not as legal advice.
Evans’ decision is not expected until next week, as Ron Clever, Kennedy-Shaffer’s attorney, got the judge’s permission to file a legal brief Monday morning.
In the meantime, whether or not he defeats his challengers in court, Kennedy-Shaffer has sought at least to unmask them.
“I’ve got a target on my back from Mr. Pianka and Mr. Koplinski,” Kennedy-Shaffer said during testimony.
Koplinski did not return multiple calls seeking comment.
This story has been updated with comments from Alex Reber, vice-chair of the Dauphin County Democratic Committee.
