WHY ACT NOW? SUPERVISOR’S MOVE IN ONE-VOTE ELECTION RAISES QUESTIONS AHEAD OF APPEAL
TOWN OF NEWBURGH, NY — In a significant escalation of a still-disputed one-vote election, Town Supervisor Gil Piaquadio has acted to recognize Paul Ruggiero as a councilmember and remove duly sworn Councilwoman Mary Lou Carolan—despite an active appeal pending before the Appellate Division and a court order that, by its own terms, preserves the current officeholder pending that appeal.
At issue is not just timing—but the interpretation of the court’s order itself.
In a letter provided to Councilwoman Carolan, the Supervisor states that the court’s April 21 order “took effect immediately” and therefore requires the Town to recognize Ruggiero.
However, the language of the order tells a different story.
What the Court Order Actually Says
The court explicitly acknowledged that Mary Lou Carolan “was sworn in and is currently serving” and further noted the “relatively short period of time before the appeal is expected to be resolved,” with “the equities weighing in favor of preserving the status quo.”
The order then makes clear that it does not take effect immediately. Instead, it specifies that it would take effect only if the Appellate Division affirms the prior ruling.
In plain terms: “Preserving the status quo” means maintaining the current officeholder—Councilwoman Carolan—until the appeal is decided.
That language appears directly at odds with the claim that the order required her removal at this time.
A One-Vote Election Demands Restraint
This race was originally certified with Carolan ahead. After litigation, the margin shifted by a single vote.
Many of the disputed ballots are publicly available through the court record, allowing residents to review ballots that were removed from Carolan’s total—some of which appear to reflect clear voter intent in her favor.
In an election decided by one vote, every ballot matters—and so does public confidence in how those ballots are treated.
Why the Urgency?
An appellate decision is expected shortly—before the next Town Board meeting.
That timing raises a critical question: Why act now, when the court itself signaled that the current officeholder should remain in place pending appeal?
One possible explanation comes down to timing and control of board votes.
The Town Board has a meeting scheduled for Tuesday, May 5th involving an employee who raised harassment allegations against senior town personnel. Any action affecting that employee would require board approval.
There are indications that a prior attempt to take such action was unsuccessful.
By changing the composition of the board—even temporarily—the voting dynamic shifts. With the Supervisor, Deputy Supervisor Scott Manley, installed Councilman Paul Ruggiero, and Councilman Anthony LoBiondo, a reliable majority could exist during this narrow window to take action in an attempt to protect those implicated in the complaint.
If so, the urgency to seat Ruggiero now may not be about resolving the election—but about securing board votes before the court issues a final determination.
This is a possible explanation based on timing and sequence of events—but it underscores why acting now raises serious and legitimate concerns.
The Law Is Clear
There has been confusion about the authority of local officials in a contested election.
The answer is straightforward: town governments do not determine the winner.
Once an election is under judicial review, the matter belongs to the courts—not local officials.
Statement from Stephen Krasner, Candidate for Town Supervisor
“When an election is decided by one vote, leaders should act with restraint—not rush to declare finality while the courts are still reviewing the case. The public deserves to see the evidence, understand what happened, and trust the outcome. Acting before that process is complete raises serious concerns about judgment and priorities.”
The Standard Must Be Higher
The Town of Newburgh deserves leadership that respects both the rule of law and the public’s trust.
In a one-vote election under active appeal—where the court itself emphasizes preserving the status quo—the priority should be patience, transparency, and discipline.
The courts will decide the outcome.
But the public can already decide whether the process reflects the integrity and fairness they expect from their government.
Public Demonstration Planned
A peaceful demonstration is planned for Saturday, May 2nd at 12 noon in front of Town Hall (1496 Route 300) in the Town of Newburgh.
Residents are expected to gather to call for transparency, accountability, and respect for the ongoing legal process.
THE BALLOTS
THE LETTER
THE COURT ORDER
