Related

The latest from our Blue Ridge Caucus politics blog

• Gilbert expresses regret for abortion remarks
• Senate rebuffs McDonnell, rejects teacher contract change

From The Roanoke Times

• Va. House passes abortion-related bills
• Newspaper ad bills OK'd by House, head to Senate
• Follow state and local political coverage from The Roanoke Times

A challenge to Del. Onzlee Ware's participation in the June 9 Democratic primary has been nixed by Roanoke Commonwealth's Attorney Donald Caldwell.

In a Monday statement, Caldwell concluded that the petitions containing voters' signatures collected to place Ware's name on the ballot are valid.

Ware has represented the 11th District in the House of Delegates, which includes portions of Roanoke and Roanoke County, since 2003.

On May 4, Martin Jeffrey, who is challenging Ware for the party's nomination, officially questioned the number and validity of the signatures Ware gathered -- and whether the affidavits on the petitions were properly certified.

As required by law, Jeffrey filed the complaint with Caldwell. At the same time, however, citing Caldwell's endorsement of the Ware campaign, Jeffrey asked that the investigation into the complaints be "assigned to unbiased parties outside the city of Roanoke."

In a news release issued Monday, Caldwell did not address that request. He was unavailable for comment because of illness.

Mark Powell, chairman of the Jeffrey campaign, said that with the end of the investigation, "the [Jeffrey] campaign believes the process has been corrupted" because Caldwell "has irreconcilable conflicts of interest. ... Independent parties should be investigating these matters."

In his release, Caldwell said he contacted Tony Reed, chairman of the Roanoke City Democratic Committee, to examine the petitions.

Under state law, Reed holds the documents, is responsible for validating them and then for certifying candidates to the state board of elections.

Jeffrey and Powell asked to see the petitions on April 10, the day they were filed, in what turned out to be what the Jeffrey campaign called a confrontational meeting with Reed.

Powell later filed a simple assault charge against the party chairman in a case that is scheduled to be heard June 26.

Although Jeffrey was allowed to review the approximately 15 pages of documents later that evening, he insisted he was given insufficient time to do so and was denied copies that he had been promised.

Caldwell wrote that he reviewed the documents himself and found about 200 signatures. Of those, state law requires that at least 125 be from voters in the district in which the candidate is seeking office. Caldwell said Reed told him he had examined the records and that the minimum had been met.

Caldwell said he also contacted all those who collected signatures and determined they had followed the law by having the petitions signed in their presence and themselves then signing affidavits to that effect.

Simply subjecting the five who collected signatures to questioning offended Ware.

Jeffrey "in his little cute antics, accused five law-abiding people who are volunteers that they might be party to wrongdoing." Ware said.

In his release, Caldwell said that, as the Jeffrey campaign alleged, the notary who certified the Ware paperwork failed to use a raised seal on the petitions. But Caldwell said that was "not fatal to the validity of the petition," especially when the people involved "are available and have verified that this process was done according to statute."

Although the Jeffrey campaign has another complaint pending before the state board of elections alleging irregularities in Ware's campaign spending, Caldwell's decision appears to end this particular challenge.

Powell said Monday that he never expected Ware's name would be taken off the ballot, but raised the issues as a matter of principle to promote transparency in elections.

Ware countered that "whether he [Jeffrey] likes it or not, my name is on there and his name is on there," he said.