Elections board ices sheriff’s race

The election for sheriff of Muscogee County has just gotten infinitely simpler.

As of Monday, the last two challengers to incumbent Sheriff John Darr were disqualified by the Muscogee County Board of Elections. So as of now, that’s that.

There is no race. Barring a successful independent or write-in campaign, Darr will be returned to office without opposition.

There is nothing good about any of this. Certainly not for the voters of Columbus.

Unopposed candidacies for public office, under almost any circumstances, are rarely the best prescription for good civic health, even when the approval rating for a public official is extraordinarily high and no opponents have stepped forward. Political challenge and public debate can focus both official and voter attention on things that matter.

Darr enjoys the loyal and vocal support of many. But he started his bid for reelection with four challengers, one of whom he defeated by only about 60 votes in 2012. The public intensity of his support is at the very least matched by that of his critics, many of whom point to his lawsuit against the city — one of four filed by local officials over departmental budgets.

All four of Darr’s challengers have now been dropped from the race not by their own choice, but by violations of qualifying regulations the wisdom and clarity of which are beginning to seem more and more debatable.

When the elections board disqualified Democrats Pam Brown and Robert Keith Smith on March 30 for failing to meet a fingerprinting deadline for criminal background checks, their rationales — that no fingerprint technician was on hand the last day of qualifying, and that Smith had inadequate information from public and party officials — seemed thin.

They still do. Maybe, as we wrote at the time, common sense as well as strict legal interpretation had prevailed in a judge’s decision to uphold their disqualification.

But the Monday ouster of remaining Democrat Donna Tompkins and Republican Mark LaJoye from the race has a different feel, especially in the case of LaJoye. He and Tompkins were removed from contention for failing to file affidavits showing their educational qualifications, and failing to file certified copies of their birth certificates.

Georgia law requires either an original birth certificate or a “certified copy” to be filed with the election superintendent; LaJoye’s notarized photocopy reportedly did not meet the standard of a “certified” copy.

We have no quarrel, nor should voters, with reasonable requirements that candidates for public office comply with qualifying law in letter and spirit. Certainly there’s nothing ambiguous about a deadline.

But the fact that all four challengers have somehow managed to run afoul of qualifying regulations leaves voters effectively disenfranchised in the 2016 election for sheriff. It’s just possible there’s something in what Smith said about a lack of adequate, or at least sufficiently clear, information.

If nothing else, we have a political dispute over a candidate’s birth certificate that actually sounds credible.

This story was originally published May 3, 2016 at 3:35 PM with the headline "Elections board ices sheriff’s race."