Commissioner Holly Muhammad’s Constituent Submits Testimony With Hopes of Changing Election Law & The Recall Process for Removing Elected Officals from Office

Today, Sonia Weil, Senior Legislative Counsel for DC Councilmember Charles Allen (Ward 6) who chairs the Committee on the Judiciary and Public Safety (under which the Board of Elections falls) has invited Tom Donohue a Ward 8 voter and small business owner to submit written testimony for a hearing to be held on January 6th that will be used to look at for possible inclusion into a comprehensive election reform bill. Tom wishes to share some thoughts on the importance of this invitation.  He posted them on his newly launched www.recallinghollymuhammad.com site which he plans to use to keep his neighbors up to date with relation to his petition.

Change can come in the form of just one or several paths one uses to take on a challenge such as the one my ANC Commissioner has put herself in.  Thanks to the new leadership transition team with the office of ANC who actually took the time to hear and offer the proper support assistance that office is tasked to offer, this matter will be heard and I am determined to make changes- good changes that make the process fair to both the voter and the elected official.

This is the way government is set up to make changes to laws the process will now take over and my recall concern will have its proper consideration before the committee tasked with changing the law of which the Board of Election must follow. Background: I currently have a petition which has been tabled with the Board of Elections They are charged with handling the recall process and making sure the requirements of the law are followed.  In their interpretation of the law they feel the law or past prescience permits the elected official’s response to a voter’s petition to say anything as long as that response is within 200 words. In Tom’s petition to recall his elected ANC Commissioner Holly Muhammad, Commissioner Muhammad attacks me personally with falsehoods and false accusations that she knows are not true and without context, anyone reading her response could take what she says as fact as it is printed on official BOE petition. More importantly what both sides says becomes permanent public record which could then be searchable for years and without context the details of what she says could be used against me knowingly or unknowingly for employment or even future political aspirations (of which I do not have) but I note that as an example of how her response could affect me as a voter that as it could affect other DC voters who wish to begin the same process to remove an elected official from office. As unprofessional Commissioner Muhammad is as proven by her response to my recall petition, she must understand that a voter is not an elected official and should not be subject to public defaming and scrutiny public officials find themselves getting. My claims in my petition are not personal they are all related to Commissioner Muhammad’s disgusting and racist words she used while serving in her official capacity as an elected official. Her response is strategic in hopes to either keep me from moving forward with my petition by dropping it or to use the resources of the Board of Elections (funded by the residents of DC through the taxes paid) by way of the actual physical petition they would print, publish and circulate it for anyone to read. That there is part of my objection – she can wright anything in her response like “Tom is a murderer” and the Board of Elections would move to have her response say just that. Commissioner Muhammad if she wanted to be a respectable elected official should have simply responded to the job related claims I have made in my petition and kept her response to those matters, instead, knowing she wanted to inject her influence as an elected official.  She knew neighbors and others would see and possibly weigh what she says more influential she decided to use her 200 words to attack me personally but she didn’t stop with just that, she made up fake claims unrelated – (and I mean completely unrelated to any issue I claim on the petition.) yet would be concerning to any of my Black neighbors potentially causing them to dismiss my claims and not sign the petition or possibly having them cast judgement upon me if they take her claims to be facts. The law needs changed so that elected officials are tasked to keeping their response to the matters the voter has raised. The elected official is given this space on the petition to allow their voice and defense to be heard and to help voters make an informed decision after hearing both sides. It is not intended to smear or intimidate the voter. The voter should be able to raise matters of concern related to official duties of that elected official without fear or intimidation. During my petition hearing (see below) I was given two options: Accept the petition as submitted by both him and Commissioner Muhammad or not and if I didn’t accept it the petition would no longer be valid to move forward, and it would go away.  Tom suggested a third option while he reviews his options to fight this.  I refuse Holly the opportunity to bully me and have any effect on me in the long term, yet I refuse to allow her any opportunity to intimidate me by getting me to drop it and allow it to go away I have a right to be heard and right to inform my neighbors of how she represents those in her single member district. The process if she respected its true intention would have been for her to make her case against my claims and let the voter decide.  Tom plans to submit testimony and will make them available for the public upon his submission which he has until January 21, 2021.

https://youtu.be/1SAXE1QA-CE

The very words she used in emails towards me. For the record: I have No affiliation to the proud boys or any other like minded organization