Last year, the Draper resident was scratched from the municipal ballot when she missed a financial-disclosure deadline by one day. Third District Judge J. Dennis Frederick allowed Draper to keep her name off, invoking a 2003 state law requiring candidates to file timely reports.

Pugh's attorney argued Mon- day that a candidate should not be excluded for technical violations that did no public harm.

"She has been maligned in Draper as a woman who can't count," attorney Joann Shields said. Pugh claims she and other candidates read the law's seven-day deadline as including Election Day, making their filings late.

Out of about 262 candidates who were required to submit campaign disclosures for municipal elections in 2003, 177 did not strictly comply and 40 turned them in after Nov. 28 - some even after Election Day. All except Pugh remained on their respective ballots.

"How do you compensate for being left off the ballot," said Pugh, who is asking that attorney fees be awarded by the high court. "The real significance of this case is to secure free and fair elections in Utah."

Shields, who called the lower-court decision "disastrous," said voters' rights and the fate of every candidate for elected office in Utah are at stake in the case. She said the notion of "substantial compliance," outlined in state election law, should apply despite Utah's new law on disclosure filing.

But attorney Todd Godfrey, representing Draper, repeated calls to dismiss the appeal as moot.

"We don't think that statute is ambiguous at all," he said. "How late is too late? What does the deadline mean?"

Justice Michael Wilkins was equally direct.

"The candidate could always simply file on time," Wilkins said. "That would put it in their hands."

Yet, Pugh insists there is more to getting her name stricken.

In filings with the high court, she claims Draper City Recorder Melanie Dansie told her that developer David Mast sent an e-mail mentioning Pugh by name and threatening to sue the city if it put a candidate on the ballot who did not file by the deadline.

"What he did is supply a showcase of the corruption that can occur if the [district court] decision stays in place," Pugh said Monday.

Mast, who has acknowledged having "a few battles,

Pugh, insists the e-mail was not directed at her.

The Supreme Court is expected to rule on the appeal before November's election.

djensen@sltrib.com