Matthew D. Huggans will remain a candidate on the ballot for House District 42 after the State Election Board voted April 25 to deny a contest of his candidacy that questioned his residency in the district.
The contest, filed by Rep. Cindy Roe on April 19, alleges that Huggans was not qualified to file as a candidate in the district because he was not residing in the district by the statutory deadline of Dec. 31, 2021.
Normally candidates for House Districts are required to live in the district and be a registered voter of the district for six months prior to filing for office. Due to the legislative redistricting that occurred in November, those requirements were changed by the Legislature for this election cycle to require candidates to be residing and registered to vote in the district by Dec. 31.
The petition filed by Roe alleges Huggans, “attempted to file a sham and fraudulent Declaration of Candidacy and change his voter registration to a rent house that he owned in District 42 that was undergoing major renovations and was clearly not being lived in by the Contestee nor anyone else.”
Roe also alleges Huggans admitted he wasn’t living in the house at a public OK2A meeting in Oklahoma City in mid-March.
During Monday’s hearing Roe’s attorney, Matthew Flies, offered evidence including photos and a written report from a private investigator hired by Roe that he said showed ongoing renovations at the address Huggans listed on his declaration of candidacy form, but no signs of anyone residing there.
Huggans told election board members during Monday’s testimony that he has lived in House District 42 since 2003. He said his previous residence, south of Pauls Valley, has been in the district for the last 18 years.
When he announced his candidacy for State Representative in September of 2021, his residence was in District 42. By the time final redistricting maps were released in November, many House Districts had shifted due to unexpected changes in census data, and Huggans’ home was no longer in the district.
Huggans testified he and his wife had purchased a house in Pauls Valley in July, intending for it to be used by their adult son. That house is still in District 42.
After the final redistricting lines were announced in November, Huggans said he and his wife made the decision to renovate the house in Pauls Valley and move in themselves so Huggans could continue his run for House District 42.
In November, they both also moved their voter registration to the new address. Huggans told the election board his intention is to move in and remain at the new address.
Huggans’ attorney, Sarah Clutts, asked him why he decided to move rather than simply file as a candidate in District 48, the district his original address was in after redistricting.
Huggans said he had already announced his run for District 42, already had campaign literature printed for that district, and as someone who had been in Roe’s district for years, he was invested in running against her.
Because renovations at the new house were extensive, Huggans said, he was not able to move in there full-time until mid-February of 2022.
“I think it is important to note but for redistricting, we would not be dealing with this issue here today,” Clutts told election board members.
In her closing statement, Clutts pointed out that Huggans “took extensive amount of personal asset and time to make sure he could move his family into this home in a condition where they could continue living there. He has taken it step, by step, by step to do everything he could to comply with the one month, one week restriction that was imposed upon him once that redistricting was signed.”
She further stated that Huggans’ situation was a redistricting issue that was “of no fault of his own.”
After both sides had presented their cases, State Election Board legal counsel, Vice Deputy Attorney General Niki Batt, reminded board members of the relevant state statute and said according to existing case law, facts evidencing intent for residency should be a deciding factor.
Board members voted 3-0 to deny the contest, keeping Huggans on the ballot for the June 28 primary.
The contest against Huggans was one of 12 contest of candidacy petitions decided by the Oklahoma State Election Board during almost 17 hours of hearings April 25. Most of the contests revolved around residency or candidate filing. Three of the 12 candidates were stricken from their respective ballots.
The hearings can be viewed on the Oklahoma State Election Board’s YouTube channel.
