ST. CROIX — A former senatorial candidate and three Virgin Islands Board of Elections members from the St. Thomas/St. John District submitted a civil complaint for a temporary restraining order and injunction today in Superior Court to prevent Chair Raymond Williams from holding meetings, including one he chaired today prior to the filing of the complaint, according to a court document.
The plaintiffs are also seeking a TRO and injunction against Williams, of St. Croix, to block him from changing the board’s bylaws or casting any votes to make such changes, as well as to block him from participating in any further financial transactions of the board as a member or its chair, until these matters are legally resolved.
The plaintiffs, representing themselves, are BOE members Lawrence Boschulte (vice chair) and his wife, Atanya Springette, and Harriet Mercer, and Collister Fahie, who finished the 2024 senatorial election in the St. Thomas/St. John District in last place with 723 votes. They filed the complaint against Williams in his individual capacity and in his position of BOE chair.
Although the plaintiffs sought a TRO to prevent Williams from chairing a BOE meeting held today at the Elections System of the Virgin Islands on St. Thomas, the meeting had concluded by the time the complaint was received by the Superior Court, Division of St. Thomas and St. John at 12:17 p.m. The three plaintiffs who are BOE members did not attend the meeting.
The plaintiffs believe Williams has knowingly, intentionally, and publicly engaged in and is liable for five counts alleged in their complaint — conflict of interest; conspiracy; abuse of authority under the color of law; violation of constitutional rights to equal protection, due process, and free association; and fraud.
Conflict of interest claim:
The plaintiffs argue that Williams — VI Lottery director and member of the Virgin Islands Public Services Commission — continues to serve as a BOE member and its chair in violation of Virgin Islands law. They cite multiple conflicts of interest under Title 3, Chapter 37, Section 1103 and Title 32, Chapter 13, Section 245(c) of the VI Code.
They also challenge former Attorney General Denise George’s legal opinion from 2022 that Williams was properly seated on the board while serving as VI Lottery director. They claimed George’s opinion relied on overly broad and farfetched definitions of the words “profession” and “occupation” that any reasonable person would find not only defies basic logic but lacks legal sufficiency and justification.
Conspiracy claim:
The plaintiffs believe Williams conspired with Supervisor of Elections Caroline Fawkes to undermine, subvert, and unlawfully change the powers of the BOE with Senator Kenneth Gittens and the 34th Legislature by allegedly placing said powers under the auspices of the supervisor through Act No. 8690. They claim Williams has refused to allow a special meeting of the BOE to either rescind, repeal, or amend Act No. 8690 despite many board members requesting a special meeting to singularly address what they described as “obvious fraud” in addition to demanding the violation of the Sunshine Law, which they noted can only be addressed through a TRO.
Abuse of authority under the color of law claim:
The plaintiffs claim Williams abused his authority under the color of law by allegedly ordering Richard Wilson, the board’s executive assistant, to not provide the other board members access to the electronic communications system for their scheduled Grievance Committee meeting, by shutting down BOE members from speaking or making motions during board meetings, and by directing the board’s secretary, Florine Audain-Hassell, to not take minutes or present minutes to board members. The plaintiffs claim Audain-Hassell has stated unequivocally that she will not take or provide meeting minutes to the board, noting she has not been removed from her position and Williams has refused to allow the board to initiate disciplinary procedures or remove her for failure to perform basic, reasonable requests by board members.
Violation of constitutional rights to equal protection, due process, and free association claim:
The plaintiffs allege that Williams has failed to uphold election laws under Title 18 of the VI Code by refusing to address a conflict of interest that, under Act No. 8690, has rendered the Board of Elections ineffective. They argue that while Title 18 maintains the BOE’s authority, the conflicting statutes must be reconciled to prevent further controversy and avoid a repeat of the 2024 incident, when the Elections supervisor sued the BOE.
They further claim that the BOE did not authorize Fawkes to represent, revise, or present Title 18 to Gittens or the 34th Legislature — an assertion they say Williams has confirmed. According to the plaintiffs, no official record of such authorization exists, leading to misinformation that affected the 2024 election. They allege this misinformation interfered with the candidacy of delegate to Congress candidate Ida Smith, resulting in defamation, voter disenfranchisement through unauthorized documents issued on Election Day, and undermined the integrity and efficacy of the entire election process.
Additionally, the plaintiffs accuse Williams of conspiring with Fawkes to suppress their rights as board members and as plaintiffs. They claim he has infringed on their right to free association and pressured Grievance Committee members to violate the Sunshine Law by restricting public access to meetings. They also allege Williams unilaterally ended hybrid BOE meetings — previously held in person and via Microsoft Teams under former Chair Alecia Wells — and now mandates in-person attendance without board approval.
Fraud claim:
The plaintiffs assert that Williams has admitted to fraud under the color of law, which they claim disqualifies him from being on the BOE. They noted that Williams testified before the Legislature on August 23, 2022 in his capacity as VI Lottery director that he had knowingly and intentionally paid an unqualified employee assigned as lottery chief a salary in full of for nine months from November 2021 even though he was aware the employee was unable to perform the job role.
Williams declined to comment on the complaint for a TRO and injunction.
BOE meeting:
As the plaintiffs seek a TRO and injunction against Williams, the BOE voted during today’s meeting to seek clarity from Attorney General Gordon Rhea on what constitutes a quorum for the 14-member board in addition to reviewing the elections laws within the next 30 days, and accepting the 2026 elections calendar as presented by Supervisor of Elections Caroline Fawkes.
After establishing a nine-member quorum (composed of two members from the St. Thomas/St. John District and seven from St. Croix) and proceeding with the introduction of staff, St. Croix member Cleopatra Peter called for a point of order. She said the elections laws under the Virgin Islands Code, Title 18 call for three members to be present from the St. Thomas/St. John District.
Williams said he also read the law, clarifying that a Joint Board of Elections existed in the past.
“The purpose of that was to ensure that for the joint board meetings, at the time, that you had representation from the next district,” he said. “I know it’s still in the code, but if you also look at the history behind the legislation, we became a single board, and the idea of a quorum was a majority of its members.”
The board’s bylaws call for a quorum of eight, with at least three members from each district.
The VI Code, Title 18, Chapter 3, Section 41(a) states that “there is a single Board of Elections that governs both election districts.” Section 41(b) calls for the 14-member board to include seven members from each district. Although Section 41(a) refers to a single board, Section 41(h) states that “the quorum of each board shall be a majority of its members.”
Audain-Hassell made a motion for the board to seek clarity from the attorney general regarding what constitutes a quorum. Her motion was approved by an 8-1 vote, with five members absent. Peter voted against the motion.
Additionally, Peter questioned Fawkes about amendments to the elections laws the 34th Legislature adopted in Act No. 8690. Fawkes clarified she did not propose any of the amendments, noting the senators made the adjustments.
As a result of the adopted amendments, Peter said sections of Title 18 relating to the board and the supervisor have similar responsibilities.
“That is a problem,” Peter said, suggesting the elections laws need further amendments to clean up the language.
Williams said the board could have that discussion and make recommendations to the Legislature. He suggested the BOE do so during a working session.
“We can clean it up if we so desire,” he said.
Kareem Francis, a St. Croix board member, subsequently moved for the board to hold a working session within 30 days and prior to the board’s next meeting to review Act No. 8690 in its entirety and discuss the board’s standard operating procedures. After receiving a second from St. Croix board member Michael Joseph and hearing no objection to the motion, Williams ordered it.
