I am in receipt of the complaint the Citizen's Party (C.P.) has forwarded to the board of elections. With regard to their complaint about the Unity Party's (U.P.) campaign literature, it seems clear that the C.P. is merely filing complaints to harass, cause undue harm and unnecessary expenses upon the U.P. It is clear that the C.P.'s complaint is frivolous at best.

The C.P. claims that the U.P. statement: "You can vote for only one person" and "you are allowed to cast only one vote" is false and misleading. The definition of "can" and "allowed" is clear to a reasonable person. According to Merriam Webster Dictionary (1997) "can" is defined as "be able to; may perhaps; be permitted by conscience or feeling to" and "allow" is defined as "to permit." Clearly, the U.P. statements were not false or misleading. Moreover, the U.P. was forced to express this message because a young voter asked a village employee if he had to vote for two. He was told to read the instructions, which stated, "vote for any two" (emphasis added). The instructions allude to the fact that this young voter had to vote for two. This is simply not the case. An individual could vote for one person, two people or write in a candidate's name.

With regard to the complaint about the The Gateway, the newspaper, according to its banner, has over 12,000 readers. The purchase of The Gateway was not a U.P. action, it was an action by an individual, who choose to exercise his right as an American to purchase a few hundred copies, to distribute to friends and family to illustrate the bias of the paper. It is clearly not "preventing the dissemination of information to the electorate." In fact, the distribution by this individual was not preventing information, it was spreading information. Moreover, the C.P. purchased additional copies of The Gateway and distributed them the morning of the election before the usual and customary time the paper is available to the public, to homeowners.

As chairman of the Unity Party I will be responding to the C.P.'s attempt to harass, cause undue harm and unnecessary expenses upon the U.P. complaint with the New York State Board of Elections. The Floral Park Unity Party believes having a choice is always better than having no choice at all. The residents of Floral Park have the inalienable right to choose whom they want to represent them. Therefore, the Floral Park Unity Party is committed to providing viable candidates, allowing residents to truly choose who will represent them in village government.

Ralph Ratto

FP Unity Party chair