OC Political

A right-of-center blog covering local, statewide, and national politics

  • Custom Campaigns

    Custom Campaigns
  • DMI

  • Lindholm for County Board of Education

  • Glasky for IUSD

  • Woolery for Auditor-Controller

  • Ming for Supervisor

  • Rackauckas for District Attorney

  • Contact Us to Purchase an Ad

  • Lincoln Club of Orange County

Candidate Claims Federal Facility as Residence on Voter Registration

Posted by Chris Nguyen on March 3, 2014

 

In an unusual incident, there is a candidate for the Orange County Board of Education, Trustee Area 5, who is claiming a federal building as a residence on her voter registration form.

The Registrar of Voters does not publish candidate addresses online. However, it does have candidate addresses available for public viewing and copying at its front counter, since candidates’ addresses are subject to public disclosure.

At OC Political, we generally do not publish home addresses. However, since this particular “home” address is a government building, we’re publishing it here, since it’s not really a home. According to the Registrar’s candidate filing log, Kimberly Clark is registered to vote with a residence address of 24551 Del Prado in Dana Point:

2014 Primary Filing Log Kimberly ClarkUSPS

Well, here’s a photo of 24551 Del Prado in Dana Point:

USPS Dana Point

In case there’s any doubt about the accuracy of that photo, click here to view the USPS Post Office locator’s description of the location in question. (If you go to 24551 Del Prado, final collection is at 5:00 PM six days a week, though its retail hours are 8:30 AM-5:30 PM on weekdays and 9:00 AM-3:00 PM on Saturday. You can get your passport photo taken or submit your passport application from 9:00 AM-2:00 PM on weekdays and 9:00 AM-12:30 PM on Saturday. The lobby is open 24/7. I was surprised to learn you could obtain burial flags at this Post Office, as my local Post Office offers no such service. For more information about the Post Office at 24551 Del Prado, call 949-496-2787.)

That’s right, Kimberly Clark is claiming a United States Post Office as her residence. Yes, I’m aware that it’s permissible to claim a post office as a mailing address, but she has PO Box 938 as her mailing address. She clearly has 24551 Del Prado as her residence address in the filing log.

I’ve heard of accusations of candidates registering to vote at addresses where they do not live, but this one has to take the cake. Usually, candidates will at least claim a residential building, but to claim a Post Office?! That’s ridiculous.

In a time when there are State Senators who have been convicted of eight felony counts for perjury and voter fraud by claiming a false residence on their voter registration forms (if you don’t know what I’m talking about, Google “Rod Wright” or Google “Roderick Wright”), you would think a candidate would be a little more discreet than claiming the Post Office as a residence.

After the District Attorney obtained search warrants for both Wright’s claimed residence in Inglewood and the residence in Baldwin Hills investigators say was his actual home, a grand jury indicted Wright in 2010. Just this January, Wright was convicted of perjury for lying about his address on voter registration forms and candidacy forms and for voting in five elections in 2008-2009 at his fraudulent address (remember, there three statewide elections in 2008 and a statewide special election in 2009; this is in addition to local 2009 elections in LA County).  Wright’s sentencing is scheduled for March 12, and he could face up to eight years in prison.  Wright’s defense hinged on the legal definition of a domicile, as opposed to the definition of a residence, but the jury didn’t buy it.  It would be more challenging to argue that a Post Office is either a domicile or a residence, as Wright claimed a residential building, rather than a Post Office.

A similar case is pending against former LA City Councilman Richard Alarcon (himself a former state senator) for perjury and voter fraud.  There is some legal wrangling over the Alarcon case, but this one is over whether prosecutors considered adequate evidence proving that Alarcon resided at his claimed address.  Again, it’d be tough to have evidence proving you reside at a Post Office.

Clark has pulled papers for OC Board of Education Trustee Area 5 to run against incumbent Elizabeth Dorn Parker and Laguna Niguel Mayor Linda Lindholm.  Parker’s Costa Mesa residency and Lindholm’s Laguna Niguel residency are both well-established and unquestioned.

(In the interest of full disclosure, Custom Campaigns, the firm that owns this blog, serves as the political consulting firm for Mayor Lindholm’s Orange County Board of Education campaign.)

7 Responses to “Candidate Claims Federal Facility as Residence on Voter Registration”

  1. Craig P. Alexander said

    I have a P.O. Box at this Post Office too – I did not know what any of them were equipped with plumbing, heating, etc. for living there! Must be one of those larger ones!!!!

    Full Disclosure – I am a supporter of Linda Lindholm to take the place of 30 + year in office RINO Liz Parker.

  2. Wait – Kimberly Clark is at 351 Phelps Dr, Irving, TX 75038! http://www.kimberly-clark.com/

  3. […] candidate Kimberly Clark is not actually a paper goods corporation running for public office, she does claim on her filing papers to be living in a U.S. Post Office.  I’d love to have added that last half-cheer to make it a full three — but, well, he […]

    • Greg makes a good point in that pingbacked article. I had only glanced at your first few paragraphs before making a funny, But how could this article even be written without a single mention – even exculpatory if you had to – of Mimi Walters?

      There must be a simple explanation…

      • Crickets — the most darling musicians of our insect friends…

      • Now that candidate filing has closed, I can finally answer this question. The answer lies in the focus of this post. I wanted to make sure Kimberly Clark did not violate the law by filing for County Board of Ed Area 5 while registered to vote at that post.

        Pointing to the Wright conviction and the Alarcon indictment served to warn Clark of the risk of filing. Pointing to Walters not being prosecuted would have encouraged Clark to file.

        (I tried to keep party out of this by not identifying anyone’s party in the post.)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 958 other followers