The Post missed the real story when reporting on DTC race

FI-Letter-to-the-EditorTo the Editor

Editor’s note: The following letter was submitted in response to the story in the March 27 edition of the Post discussing the contentious one-vote victory of DTC Chairman Frank Farricker over challenger Elizabeth Krumeich.

The article on Frank Farricker’s one-vote victory as chairman of the Greenwich Democratic Town Committee missed the interesting backstory.

The turning point in the election was a ruling Frank received that new members selected to fill vacancies after the caucuses were not legally selected because chosen before the start of their new terms on March 5. Traditionally, any vacancies would be filled so all 75 spots would be filled before the first meeting. The districts had to meet again to fill the same vacancies with the same people.

None of the new members could vote because bylaws provide members elected to fill vacancies cannot vote at the meeting when they are presented. They had all been presented at previous meetings so they could vote on March 19, but now had to be presented again and were disqualified from voting.

Laurie Heiss resigned so Nancy Brown to vote in her place, believing it would take effect upon Nancy becoming a voting member. Both had committed to Beth, but Nancy was one of the four not permitted to vote.

The GDTC Secretary had emailed Laurie, “It appears you will be eligible to vote at tonight’s organizational meeting. You are still listed with the Democratic State Central Committee and the Town Clerk as a full member of District 1.” Laurie was presented with a ballot with her name printed on it but Frank presented a letter of resignation from Laurie (never produced at the meeting) to disqualify her vote for Beth and thus avoid a tie.

No one told Laurie her vote had been disqualified. Because the disqualification was never made public Laurie was not able to explain her intent to serve until replaced by Nancy and the ruling of the chair disqualifying her vote could not be appealed. We were headed to a re-vote when the chair ruled the two abstentions were counted as non-votes, allowing Frank to win by one vote.

Was all this legal? Possibly, depending on when Laurie’s resignation was effective.

In the interest of party unity Beth didn’t contest the results. The upshot of all this political maneuvering was that Frank was re-elected with the support of only 28 of the 75 members.


Edward Krumeich II


The author is the husband of Elizabeth Krumeich.

By participating in the comments section of this site you are agreeing to our Privacy Policy and User Agreement

© Hersam Acorn. All rights reserved. The Greenwich Post, 10 Corbin Drive, Floor 3, Darien, CT 06820

Designed by WPSHOWER

Powered by WordPress