Recount in Sanirajak mayor race delayed until Nov. 3
Cancelled flight cause of delay: chief electoral officer
A vote recount to determine who Sanirajak’s new mayor will be is delayed until Nov. 3 because a cancelled flight has prevented a justice of the peace from travelling to the community for the recount, Nunavut’s chief electoral officer Dustin Fredlund said. (File photo)
Residents of Sanirajak will have to wait another week to learn who their new mayor will be after a recount was delayed until Nov. 3.
Monday night’s municipal election in the community ended with a tie between two candidates: Ammie H. Kipsigak and Philip Anguratsiaq, who each received 57 votes in the four-way race for mayor.
Elections Nunavut was set to hold a vote recount Friday at the hamlet chambers after a justice of the peace recount was requested.
However, a cancelled flight meant the justice of the peace could not travel to the hamlet in time for the recount, said Dustin Fredlund, Nunavut’s chief electoral officer, late Thursday.
If there’s still a tie after the recount, the race will be settled by a draw. Those results are final, Fredlund said.
Residents in Sanirajak cast 171 votes for mayor in Monday’s election. Voter turnout was 43.2 per cent, according to Elections Nunavut’s website.
Jason Kaernerk finished in third place with 33 votes, while fourth place’s David Curley had 24.
Imagine having to fly people in to count 171 ballots. Oh wait, we don’t have to imagine.
Imagine being the candidate that requested the JP-supervised recount after an administrative recount by the Returning Officer had already been completed on election night. This could have been settled October 24th with the same draw process that will likely end up occurring on Nov.3rd after the JP counts the ballots for a third time.
Democracy is important in communities large and small.
If commentators are not prepared to pay the modest costs of an overtly fair election – then they should ask themselves if they are prepared to pay the costs of the alternative.
Democracy is important in communities large and small.
If commentators are not prepared to pay the modest costs of an overtly fair election – then they should ask themselves if they are prepared to pay the costs of the alternative.