Last Updated on 6/19/2013

Published on 6/6/2012

The state Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that the Florence County Republican Party was wrong in its approach to certifying primary election candidates and ordered the county to remove those candidates names from the ballot.
It was unclear how the ruling would affect ballots in Georgetown County and the rest of the state.
“The state has not let us know what was said and what was done,” said Donna Mahn, the county’s director of voter registration and elections. “We’re on stand-by.” 
At issue is a 1991 state law requiring candidates to turn in a Statement of Economic Interest when they file their candidacy. The law exempted incumbents at all government levels, who must annually file the forms by April 15. Legislators say the law was written that way to avoid duplication in election years. But it contributed to confusion after a 2010 law required online filing.
While the intent was to reduce paperwork, the Legislature didn’t match up separate sections of the law pertaining to annual and candidate filing.
Florence County Democrats filed suit challenging several of their Republican counterparts who appear on the primary ballot.
The lawsuit, heard by the justices Monday,   alleges Florence Republicans ignored a May 1 ruling from the South Carolina Supreme Court and recertified candidates who did not properly file election documents.
The court grilled attorneys for more than an hour and a half over whether the Florence County GOP followed their early May ruling.
The high court ruled that the state law still requires those seeking office to file paperwork in person within the two-week filing period.
It directed the parties to recertify only those who followed the rules and submit their revised candidate lists by May 4.
Nearly 200 candidates were tossed statewide, but attorneys contend more would have been removed had all party leaders in other counties complied.
In Georgetown County, two Republican candidates – Rod Stalvey and Tammie Avant — were disqualified but at least four more were certified and placed on the ballot.
Georgetown County Republican Party chairman Jim Jerow, who confirmed in mid-May that candidates who filed with him did not file both forms at the same time, has not returned numerous phone messages seeking comment since that time.
Stalvey welcomed the Supreme Court ruling.
“I think justice has been served,” he said. “If I had been approved and put on the list I would have been the first person to step forward and say remove my name from the list.” 
The Supreme Court directed the Florence election commission, if able, to remove the affected candidates’ names from the ballot and, if not possible, to post the candidates’ names on signs at the polling places to indicate votes cast for those candidates will not be counted.
If the ruling is enforced statewide, Mahn wasn’t sure the county would have time to “build another database and clear every machine we’ve got ready before Tuesday’s primary.”
She said it would be easier to print signs to display at polling places.
Only one race on the county’s ballot, State Senate 32, is directly affected by the Florence decision since the district encompasses both counties.
The cost of the changes is to be paid for by the Republican Party, according to the ruling.
An attorney for the Florence Republican party argued that the candidates in question were recertified because they are exempt from rules about filing economic impact statements because they technically count as public officials once they declare candidacy.
At the root of the argument is interpretation of different sections of state law over when a person becomes a candidate and if that makes them a public official, even if they are not officially on the ballot yet.
This argument, however, only came forward a couple of weeks ago, eliciting several justices to express their disappointment and anger.
Chief Justice Jean Toal expressed deep concern that the exemption argument was not what Florence Republicans were thinking about when they certified candidates who did not meet the court’s requirements, effectively ignoring the ruling.
Drawing even more reproach was the fact that the response to the lawsuit stated that the Republicans followed the ruling very carefully.

Times and SCNow staff reports