Dispute over 2021 election outcome continues
Robbinsville – A few months have passed, but it appears results from one local 2021 election will continue to be contested.
After having voter protests dismissed at both the local and state levels in November, Town of Lake Santeetlah council member Diana Simon has filed eight separate voter challenges against a family of six – the Hutsells: Amelia, Dean, Kaylee, Linda, Olivia and Savannah – as well as John and Tina Emerson. Tina was one of three new members voted onto the council in November.
The Graham Star obtained copies of the filings from the Graham County Board of Elections. In totality, 465 pages exist in the paperwork, with the largest portions reserved for Tina (143 pages) and John (142). The filings were made through Asheville-based law firm Roberts & Stevens.
Both protests in November were dismissed due to a combination of missing exhibits and incomplete forms. That is not the case with the new challenges, as the thoroughness in the filings seem to make up for the lack of evidence provided originally.
The Hutsells
Across each of the eight forms, boxes are checked for the following challenges:
* The person is not a resident of the county in which the person is registered;
* The person is not a resident of the precinct in which the person is registered;
* The person is not a resident of the municipality in which the person is registered.
It is well known that Lake Santeetlah is mostly populated by part-time residents who live in Graham County during the spring and summer before departing for another part-time residence for the late fall and early winter.
The Hutsells’ challenges are unique in that throughout much of the documents, addresses of employers, social-media screen grabs of current locations and even tax-assessor bills tend to show the majority of their time is spent elsewhere.
But the family might have one – if not two – legs to stand on throughout the process.
“In or around 2018,” as verbiage contained within Dean’s challenge says, the Hutsells’ Lake Santeetlah residence was destroyed by a fire. Work to rebuild the home has lagged, with one photograph showing the structure just receiving new siding sometime between Nov. 4, 2021, and Jan. 8, 2022.
But more importantly, the intent to reside in Graham County is protected by N.C. G.S. 163-57.
“All election officials in determining the residence of a person offering to register or vote, shall be governed by the following rules, so far as they may apply: (1) That place shall be considered the residence of a person in which that person's habitation is fixed, and to which, whenever that person is absent, that person has the intention of returning …” reads the beginning of the statute.
However, the challenge does later show that Dean Hutsell had voted exclusively in Buncombe County from 1992 to 2020, before switching his registration to Graham County on Sept. 29, 2021. On the voter registration form Dean completed, he lists a mailing address in Fairview, a suburb of Asheville – as do the other Hutsells.
It is important to note that each of the Hutsell children have stated an intention to retire to Lake Santeetlah. When contacted by The Star, Dean Hutsell declined to comment on this story.
The Emersons
Tina and John Emerson have much of the same evidence compiled by Simon and the law firm, with one glaring exception: the Emersons do have a livable structure at Lake Santeetlah. But included in the affidavit is the claim that Simon has not – through her familiarity with the Emerson’s Santeetlah residence – seen the residence occupied on a “permanent” basis.
“I base this assertion on the fact that, except when I am on vacation, I drive by the Alleged Residence on an almost daily basis and have not seen anyone staying at the Alleged Residence on a regular basis, have not observed any cars associated with the owners of the property at the Alleged Residence on a regular basis, and have not observed any lights or other use of the property that would indicate that someone was permanently residing in the Alleged Residence,” reads one paragraph of the affidavit.
The Star did reach out to Simon and Tina Emerson for comment on this story. Simon indicated that she would provide a statement, barring legal approval, but a response was not was received by press time Wednesday.
What follows the affidavit and voter-registration are multiple photos of the Emersons’ Lake Santeetlah residence. At this point, council member Jim Hager appears in the filing with his own sworn affidavit, noting the presence of a silver Chevy SUV that is often parked at the Emersons’ Santeetlah home, but “is not the vehicle primarily used by Mr. Emerson. Ms. Emerson’s primary vehicle is a white Volvo sedan. Mr. John Emerson’s primary vehicle is a large black SUV.
“I have only seen John Emerson in the Town of Lake Santeetlah twice during the time period between Jan. 1, 2022 and May 11, 2022.”
Hager’s affidavits were also filed June 1. He, too, was contacted by The Star for this story, but a response was not received by press time.
Instead, the filing contends that the Emersons reside at a property in Mathews, a suburb of Charlotte. According to the voter-registration forms included in the challenges, John voted in Mecklenburg County from 2004-20 before switching his registration to Graham County on Sept. 28, 2021.
In Tina’s case, she has voted in Mecklenburg during the same time period. However, she switched to Graham County to vote in both the 2017 and 2021 elections.
Protest history
Residents of Lake Santeetlah were stunned when the results from the November election were in.
New to the council were Connie Gross – who has since been appointed mayor – plus Ralph Mitchell and Tina Emerson. Simon actually received the most nods of approval (22), while Hager tied with Keith Predmore for the fifth and final seat with 11 votes. Hager won out via a coin-flip tiebreaker.
Simon emailed Graham County Board of Elections Director Teresa Garland shortly after the results were announced, stating that she was “surprised” by the voter turnout for the town – most notably, the amount of write-in votes. There were 67 write-ins, or 52.37 percent of the total votes cast in the municipality.
Protests were filed shortly thereafter, which sought to have the votes for Gross and Emerson thrown out, as well as the desire for a new election altogether to be held.
However, section 14 of the voter-protest form – “affected parties and service” – was left blank on both submissions. The section requires that anyone being challenged be notified within one business day of the protests being filed and notes that it is up to the protester to provide service to those being challenged, whether it be through an attorney or a mailed document.
Separate challenges about voter eligibility were filed – but not valid, as any such paperwork was due the 25th day before the election took place, per N.C. G.S. 163-85.
The Graham County Board of Elections dismissed the protests at a special Nov. 17 hearing. N.C. State Board of Elections Executive Director Karen Brinson Bell later informed both Simon and Hager of the dismissal of the protests at the state level Dec. 6.
Citing N.C. G.S. 163-127(c), N.C. G.S. 163-182.9 and N.C. G.S. 163-127.2(a), the board dismissed both Simon and Hager's appeals for not being filed in a timely manner.
"Rather than follow these requirements, Simon filed a candidacy challenge with the Graham County Board of Elections, using the State Board's candidacy challenge form that may be used up until 10 days after the close of election filing," a portion of Brinson Bell's explanation read.
Furthermore, Simon's appeals "contends that the county board did not properly consider her candidacy challenge …" and that 11 different voters "improperly registered to vote" in Lake Santeetlah, "which substantially changed the outcome of the election."
After Hager, who most recently served as the town's mayor, was struck down at the local level, he mailed the State Board of Elections an appeal, which did not follow N.C. G.S. 182.11(a): “Written notice of the appeal must be given to the county board within 24 hours after the county board files the written decision at its office."
In the form mailed to the state, Hager contended the Graham County Board of Elections processed his candidate and voter challenges, but said he "never filed an election protest;" rather, Hager said in the appeal that the Graham County board "should have considered his candidate challenges and voter challenges."
A date for the hearing concerning the latest filings has not been set.