District Attorney John Sarsfield added three misdemeanor charges
of illegal use of voter registration information to
supervisor-elect Jaime De La Cruz’s four felony counts of election
forgery and perjury Monday.
Hollister – District Attorney John Sarsfield added three misdemeanor charges of illegal use of voter registration information to supervisor-elect Jaime De La Cruz’s four felony counts of election forgery and perjury Monday.
The new charges follow another twist in the District 5 dispute after Sarsfield charged a Hollister woman with voting twice in March’s hotly-contested election and said supporters of the De La Cruz camp urged her to do so. The woman, Maria Guadalupe Araujo, and Ignacio Velazquez, De La Cruz’s campaign adviser during the March election, denied any wrong-doing and swear the issue is all a misunderstanding.
De La Cruz passed on a deal that expired Friday that would have whittled his felony charge down to a misdemeanor charge with no jail time, on the condition that he give up all of his elected positions – including his Supervisor seat. His new charges could tack on an extra year to his maximum four-year sentence.
De La Cruz declined to comment on the matter Monday because he was admitted to Salinas Valley Memorial Hospital that day. Velazquez said the supervisor-elect was admitted for an infection related to his kidney failure which could have been brought on by the recent stress of facing felony charges and possible jail time.
“He’ll probably be released tomorrow,” Velazquez said. “Last I heard he’s doing better.”
The new charges stem from an investigation of the March election conducted by Santa Cruz investigator Aaron Tripp that the Board of Supervisors commissioned after De La Cruz beat Supervisor Bob Cruz by 10 votes.
Sarsfield said while Tripp was probing allegations that De La Cruz campaigned illegally, De La Cruz inappropriately accessed the voter database to look up Tripp’s address. During an interview, Sarsfield said De La Cruz allegedly told Tripp he “knew where he lived,” and Tripp took the statement as an attempt to intimidate him.
Sarsfield said if De La Cruz had agreed to take the deal, the charges would never have been added.
“He never did (contact me),” Sarsfield said. “Which is fine.”
Sarsfield charged De La Cruz on Dec. 8 with four felony counts arising from his campaign for supervisor in 2003. Sarsfield said De La Cruz illegally signed a nomination petition circulated by someone else, but the supervisor-elect said the charges stem from a petition with three signatures worth a 75 cent discount toward his filing fee that he mistakenly signed and submitted to the elections office.
De La Cruz and Velazquez then filed a $5 million lawsuit against the county the next day, alleging corruption within the Board of Supervisors and District Attorney’s Office and claiming that members of the Board violated their civil rights.
De La Cruz is scheduled to be sworn in Jan. 4 to his supervisor seat and is scheduled to appear in court nine days later.
Velazquez said the new charges are Sarsfield’s response to the lawsuit and another form of intimidation.
“He’s just coming up with new things,” Velazquez said. “He’s embarrassed, because people are going to find out the county has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to charge Jaime for 75 cents.”
Sarsfield has dismissed the corruption allegations as ridiculous and said he has enough evidence to charge De La Cruz.
De La Cruz’s misdemeanor charges are the most recent charges brought concerning the District 5 race. Araujo was charged last week with voting twice, and if convicted the felony charge could land the 37-year-old mother of two in jail for up to three years.
Sarsfield said Araujo mailed in an absentee ballot and voted on Election Day, and that supporters from the De La Cruz camp urged her to do so.
But Araujo said the whole thing was an honest mistake and although she voted for De La Cruz, she would never break the law to get him an extra vote.
She didn’t think her absentee ballot had been mailed in, so she voted with a provisional ballot on Election Day, she said. If someone votes with a provisional ballot the Elections Office is supposed to disqualify that ballot if their absentee ballot shows up prior to the election.
The Elections Office received Araujo’s absentee ballot on Election Day, but it wasn’t counted until the day after, according to elections clerk Kim Hawk. When Araujo went to the polls on Election Day there was no record that her ballot had been received, so poll workers allowed her to vote again, she said.
“It was an honest mistake. I know that’s against the law to vote twice, I’m not stupid. I’m not going to do something stupid so he (De La Cruz) would win,” Araujo said. “Now my family is saying, ‘That’s what you get for voting.’ But you’re supposed to vote. Now people are afraid to vote.”
Araujo swears she was given a provisional ballot, but Registrar John Hodges said there may have been some confusion over which ballot she received because just before she arrived the elections inspector had a heart attack – leaving the poll in a brief state of chaos.
“She should have been given a provisional ballot, but they didn’t because the inspector was in the hospital,” Hodges said.
Velazquez, De La Cruz’s campaign adviser, said he contacted someone at the Araujo household to tell them to be sure to vote on Election Day, but never coerced someone into voting twice.
Araujo said her family received phone calls from supporters from both Cruz and De La Cruz’s campaigns, but no one told her to vote twice.
Araujo is scheduled to appear in court on Jan. 13 – the same day as De La Cruz.
But Sarsfield said the charge could be reduced to a misdemeanor, but wouldn’t go into the specifics of what would warrant that change.
A misdemeanor conviction could land her in jail for up to 12 months, but depending on the judge’s sentencing decision, she could also receive probation with no jail time, Sarsfield said.
Either way, Araujo believes she did nothing wrong and shouldn’t be charged at all.
“I don’t want to have a bad record,” she said. “If I have to pay expenses then I’m going to sue. It’s not like I did it intentionally.”
Erin Musgrave covers public safety for the Free Lance. Reach her at 637-5566, ext. 336 or [email protected]
