January 15, 2009
More evidence that Sherril Huff didn't move to King County in time to legally declare candidacy

You can't make this stuff up.

As noted earlier, Sherril Huff claims to have moved to King County on Dec. 9, only two days before filing her candidacy papers for Elections Director. Chris Clifford has formally challenged Huff's residence, claiming that she was not yet a bona fide resident of King County at the time she filed, and therefore ineligible to run for the office.

On Tuesday, Clifford submitted a post-hearing motion to the canvassing board asserting that Huff's attorney Jenny Durkan had provided incorrect information at the challenge hearing regarding the date when Huff finally vacated her recent residence in Kitsap County.

Durkan responded by obtaining a letter from Huff's Kitsap landlord, apparently hoping to prove that Huff really had vacated the Kitsap home. She probably wasn't expecting this:

[Huff] gave legal notice to terminate the residency the 11th of December. In that notice she stated that while she would be moving before the end of the month, she would retain possession of the home until December 31st
Oops. So by Huff's own statement, as of the date that she filed for office, she would be moving in the future.

In her cover e-mail to the canvassing board, Durkan's attempt to defend Huff's King County residency includes a self-incriminating lacuna:

5. Ms. Huff has been living at the registered address in King County home since December.
Hmm. I wonder why Durkan wouldn't want to state a firm date when Huff actually moved to King County.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at January 15, 2009 07:52 PM | Email This
Comments
1. Sounds like several people may be Happy Pampers. I think I will vote for Bill Anderson.

Posted by: me on January 15, 2009 08:17 PM
2. Stefan, do you know the specific laws governing residency requirements?

Posted by: pudge on January 15, 2009 09:47 PM
3. Pudge, I'm not a lawyer, but here are a few things to look at:

RCW 29A.20.021

1) A person filing a declaration of candidacy for an office shall, at the time of filing, be a registered voter and possess the qualifications specified by law for persons who may be elected to the office.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=29A.20.021

King County Charter

Section 630 Qualifications.
Each county officer holding an elective office shall be, at the time of his appointment or election and at all times while he holds office, at least twenty-one years of age, a citizen of the United States and a resident and registered voter of King County;
http://kingcounty.gov/council/legislation/~/media/Council/documents/Clerk/CodeFiles/03_Charter.ashx

RCW 29A.04.151

"Residence" for the purpose of registering and voting means a person's permanent address where he or she physically resides and maintains his or her abode.
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=29A.04.151

There's a lot of case law on the subject of residence for voting purposes. The closest state case that I know of is when Gary Schoessler was elected Mayor of Wenatchee several years ago, but his election was nullified because he didn't meet the residency requirement.
http://www.tvw.org/modules/opinions/690481_o.htm

Huff's statement to her landlord that she "would be moving" in the days after she filed is extremely interesting.

Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on January 15, 2009 10:02 PM
4. Just a quick glance, it appears that RCW 42.04.020 says only that an officeholder of a specific area must be "an elector" of that area: i.e., legally registered to vote in that area.

Here's a question: you cannot vote unless you've lived at that residence for 30 days. Does that mean you are not actually an elector for 30 days?

Are there statutory guidelines for living at an address?

Regardless, at this point, I think Huff should be required to prove the date of her moving to King County.

Posted by: pudge on January 15, 2009 10:07 PM
5. At what point can a lawyer be disbarred for knowingly attempting to lie or deceive a judge when evidence that she herself introduced into the record earlier disproves her statement to a court?

But here is another test of degree of corruption in King County and its courts. Will any of these clear and indefensible facts brought by Clifford result in Huff being forced to withdraw from the race?

My money is on NO.

Posted by: Reality on January 15, 2009 10:12 PM
6. That's a good one too, Pudge. Again, not being a lawyer I'm not sure how a judge would interpret all these things. But an "elector" as I understand it is someone who possesses all qualifications to be eligible to vote. Among these is 30 days of residence in the precinct. If this statute also applies, then Huff would have had to live in King County 30 days before she filed. And that's clearly not the case.

Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on January 15, 2009 10:13 PM
7. Thanks Stefan ... yeah, so it hinges on some subjective definitions for people with multiple residences (or in-between). But regardless of how the law may apply to her situation generally (how many hours she spent in one place vs the other on which days and so on), you're absolutely right that she very much incriminated herself here.

Posted by: pudge on January 15, 2009 10:16 PM
8. Poor Sherril Huff. She's a Democrat. She wants to exist in the world where her good intentions mean more that reality of the laws we live by. And the rest of the Dems and their media PR wing will look the other way and give her a pass. If any Republican even jaywalks, it's a 70 point headline. These are the double standard times we live in.

Posted by: Jeff B. on January 16, 2009 08:45 AM
9. Ladies and Gentlemen, as someone who has studied these laws and deciphered them time and time again, this is a pretty open and shut case. In a nutshell, the State Constitution says 30 days, while the RCW says "intent." The notorious burden of the latter is in Huff's favor and she registered as a resident 30 days prior. She is eligible.

Posted by: unanimous on January 19, 2009 01:29 AM
10. King County Charter

Section 630 Qualifications.
Each county officer holding an elective office shall be, at the time of his appointment or election and at all times while he holds office, at least twenty-one years of age, a citizen of the United States and a resident and registered voter of King County;

After reading the part that says the office holder must be a resident at the time of "election", I would surmise that she would indeed meet that deadline. It does not say she had to be a resident at the time of filing. Only that she had to be at the time of the election. And I believe a judge will rule the same.

Posted by: Ridge on January 19, 2009 05:17 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?