‘Long history of tension’ within Independent Party alleged

Republican Bob Stefanowski’s attempt to reduce the competition for governor and delete Independent Party nominee Rob Hotaling from the November ballot is the latest salvo in a long-running battle between various leaders within the minor party that dates back years, according to new court documents.

Scheduled for trial in Hartford Superior Court on Thursday morning, current party leadership, led by Michael Telesca of Waterbury, filed a motion Tuesday to suppress an effort in favor of Stefanowski. Stefanowski is supported by members of the party who lost out on leadership in recent years after another state judge ruled in favor of the Waterbury group back in 2019.

“This is the latest lawsuit in the long history of tension between factions of the Independent Party of Connecticut, one which historically sought to cross-endorse Republicans, and one (headed by Telesca) that seeks to nominate alternatives to the major parties,” the latest filing says.

Stefanowski has demanded numerous documents that Telesca opposes releasing because he claims they are irrelevant to the case and would delay a speedy trial on the issue.

Telesca’s legal team stressed that his aim has been to make the Independent Party a real voice in state politics by supporting its own candidates. “He and the current leadership have sought to return the party to its original mission of offering voters an alternative to the major party candidates,” the latest memo to the court said.

In 2014 and 2018, the Independent Party crossendorsed losing Republican candidates for governor including Tom Foley of Greenwich and Stefanowski, of Madison. State Rep. Laura Devlin is Stefanowski’s lieutenant governor running mate this year.

“Rather than competing with Hotaling at the ballot box, Stefanowski and Devlin ask the court to limit voters’ choices,” wrote William M. Bloss, an Independent Party member who is Telesca’s attorney. “That the court should not interfere in this election will be addressed later, but suffice it to say for the purpose of this motion to quash the court should be reluctant to order the party nominating a candidate competing with the lead plaintiff to produce materials regarding its nominating and deliberative process. That is particularly true based on the narrow allegations of the operative complaint.”

Stefanowski has requested a variety of documents, including the paper ballots cast that night; party member lists; identification affirmations; and sign-in sheets.

“But none of these documents can bear in any way on the allegations of the complaint, which are that the party and Telesca violated bylaws in breaking a tie vote,” Bloss wrote.

Stefanowski claims that the party failed to follow its own rules on the night of Aug. 23, where in a Guilford community center the caucus vote between Hotaling and Stefanowski was deadlocked at 79 votes each before Telesca, who had voted for Hotaling, broke the tie with another vote, then declared Hotaling the nominee. Then tempers rose, Stefanowski supporters started yelling and pointing, and Hotaling rose to accept the nomination, stressing that statewide voters could still find Stefanowski on the Republican ballot line in November.

“A political party has a First Amendment right to limit its membership as it wishes, and to choose a candidate-selection process that will in its view produce the nominee who best represents its political platform,” Bloss wrote. “The court should be wary of ordering production of internal party communications to an adverse political candidate, particularly when they have no bearing on the narrow claim alleged – a breach of published party bylaws.”