Ingram, 2026 ESD 83
OFFICE OF THE ELECTION SUPERVISOR
for the
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS
IN RE: INGRAM, MICAH ) Protest Decision 2026 ESD 83
)
Protestor. ) Issued: May 19, 202
)
______________________________) OES Case No. P-137-032726
INTRODUCTION
Micah Ingram, member of Teamsters Local Union 190 (“Local 190”), filed a protest with the Office of the Election Supervisor (OES) on behalf of the Fearless 190 Slate, on which Ingram was a candidate for delegate to the International Convention. Ingram’s protest alleged that the Fearless 190 Slate was required to use the printing vendor identified by Merriman River Group, which Local 190 engaged to oversee its delegate election process. Ingram further argued that either “gross negligence” by the vendor or “intentional interference” by an unidentified party resulted in Fearless 190 campaign literature being delivered to Local 190 members two weeks after the election ballots were delivered. For the reasons detailed below, we DENY the protest.
Election Supervisor Deborah Schaaf investigated this protest.
RELEVANT BACKGROUND
Local 190 is entitled to 2 delegates and 1 alternate delegate to the IBT International Convention. Pursuant to the election plan approved by OES, Local 190 members were mailed ballots to their home address before March 17, 2026. The completed ballot was required to be returned by mail by April 17, 2026. The Local 190 election involved two slates vying for election as delegates to the Internation Convention: the United 190 Slate and the Fearless 190 Slate.
Local 190 engaged Merriman River Group (MRG) of Hamden, Connecticut to conduct the election process.[1] As part of its contract, MRG assists candidates and/or slates with campaign mailings in accordance with the procedure described in the local’s requisite OES Form 24 (‘Procedures for Complying with Candidate Requests for Distribution of Literature’) submitted to the OES.
MRG informed each slate that it had three options regarding distribution of campaign literature: (1) request the local union to do the printing and/or mailing at the slate’s expense; (2) request the local union or the IBT to provide the membership list to a mail house selected by the slate; or (3) contract with Connecticut Direct Mail (CDM), the mail house MRG uses for such purposes.
Fearless 190 opted to contract with CDM to print and mail its campaign postcards to Local 190 members. On March 3, 2026, MRG obtained the ballot distribution list from the IBT and immediately transmitted that distribution list to CDM. CDM, in turn, arranged for the printing of the Fearless 190 campaign literature – in this case, campaign postcards – by Allegra Printing. The printing was completed on March 4, 2026 as documented on a paid invoice provided by Ingram.
On March 5, 2026, Matt Turlis, the owner of CDM, delivered the Fearless 190 campaign postcards to the New Haven Post Office. According to United States Postal Service (“USPS”) Form 3602-R, the post office received 1,605 pieces of Fearless Slate campaign mail at 3:19pm and processed payment at 3:21pm.
The Fearless 190 Slate chose the marketing mail (or “bulk”) option for delivery, for which USPS estimates delivery within 3-10 business days, instead of first-class mail option, with estimated delivery within 1-5 business days. Although that decision resulted in a cost savings to the Fearless 190 Slate of approximately $364, it appears that it resulted in the USPS not prioritizing delivery of that campaign material.[2] USPS tracking data evidenced that the Fearless 190 campaign material was not further processed by USPS for delivery until fourteen days later on March 19, 2026. According to Ingram, the Fearless 190 campaign literature was not actually delivered to Local 190 members until March 26, 2026, five days after the Local 190 ballots were delivered. In contrast, the United 190 Slate opted for first-class mailing from the same New Haven, Connecticut post office; the United 190 campaign material was delivered to Local 190 members on the same date as the election ballot.
The Local 190 election resulted in the United 190 Slate garnering approximately 62% of the 189 ballots cast, i.e. a margin of 46 votes over those cast for the Fearless 190 Slate.
INVESTIGATION AND FINDING
The OES Investigator interviewed Micah Ingram, Jim Soumas, the Secretary-Treasurer of Local 190, Matthew Fitch of MRG, and Matthew Turlis of CDM. Additionally, the investigator reviewed the records regarding payment of the printer (Allegra) and USPS records referenced above.
During his interview by the investigator, Ingram admitted that he misunderstood the Rules, i.e. he now understands that the Rules do not require that the Fearless 190 Slate contract with a specific vendor for the printing and distribution of its campaign literature. Ingram stated that he likely misunderstood that because the United 190 Slate was using CDM and it was associated with MRG.
For its part, Soumas denied any involvement by the United 190 Slate in the Fearless 190 Slate mailing. As the Fearless 90 campaign postcards were confirmed to be in the possession of USPS as of March 5, 2026, there is nothing to suggest that the United 190 Slate played any role in the delay.
With respect to the mailing option chosen by Fearless 190, the investigator spoke with Matt Fitch of MRG and a different, uninvolved agency regarding the reliability of marketing mailing. Both informed the investigator that – despite the USPS estimate of 3-10 business days for delivery in the USPS in its marketing material – it is not uncommon for materials being sent by bulk delivery to take up to three weeks to be delivered.
ACCORDINGLY, we find:
(a) The Rules do not require, and the Fearless 190 Slate was not mandated to contract with a certain vendor for the printing and distribution of its campaign literature;
(b) Neither Local 190 nor the United 190 Slate was played any role in the delayed delivery of the Fearless 190 campaign literature; and
(c) Neither Connecticut Direct Mail nor Allegro Printing was responsible for the delayed delivery of the Fearless 190 campaign literature.
For these reasons, we find no violation of the Rules and DENY the protest.
APPELLATE RIGHTS
Pursuant to Article XIII, Section 3(f), any interested party not satisfied with this determination may request a hearing before the Election Appeals Master within three (3) working days of receipt of this decision. All parties are reminded that, absent extraordinary circumstances, no party may rely in any such appeal upon evidence that was not presented to the Office of the Election Supervisor. Requests for a hearing shall be made in writing, shall specify the basis for the appeal, and shall be served upon:
Election Appeals Master
Barbara Jones
Election Appeals Master
IBTappealsmaster@bracewell.com
Copies of the request for hearing must be served upon the parties, as well as upon the Election Supervisor for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. Service may be accomplished by email, using the “reply all” function on the email by which the party received this decision. A copy of the protest must accompany the request for hearing. A copy of the protest must accompany the request for hearing.
Timothy S. Hillman
Election Supervisor
cc: Barbara Jones, IBTappealsmaster@bracewell.com
DISTRIBUTION LIST (BY EMAIL UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE):
Micah Ingram
Richard Hooker
John Palmer
Matt Fitch
James L. Donovan Jr.
Edward M. Gleason, Jr.,
David Suetholz
Will Bloom
Ken Paff
Thomas Kokalas
Timothy S. Hillman
Paul Dever
Deborah Schaaf
Greg Friedholm
Kelly Hogan
kelly.hogan@nelsonmullins.com[1] MRG is a recognized election management services provider that has been engaged by the IBT and local Teamster unions since 2001 to oversee IBT delegate and officer elections.
[2] The price per piece of mail for the mass marketing mail option ranged between $.37 and $.44, for a total cost of $615.47 for the Fearless 190 mailing. First-class delivery of the campaign material ($.61 / piece) would have cost Fearless 190 approximately $979.