This online news website is owned and operated by Becky Watts. If you enjoy reading Pike County Times, consider buying an advertisement for your business or sending a donation to support the only free online newspaper in Pike County. Donations can be sent to: The Pike County Times, PO Box 843, Zebulon, Georgia 30295. Click here to donate through PayPal. Thanks for supporting Pike County's only free online newspaper!
By Editor Becky Watts
ZEBULON - Elections Superintendent Lynn Brandenburg heard a challenge to a candidate’s residency on Friday, March 21st in the Pike County Courtroom. Candidate Robert E. Adams, Jr. filed a challenge to Incumbent Charles “Charlie” Garrard’s residency in the Board of Education District 4 race. The outcome of this hearing was to determine whether or not Mr. Garrard is eligible to be on the ballot against Mr. Adams.
Mr. Adams said that he had been contacted by people who live in Mr. Garrard’s neighborhood who say that Mr. Garrard hasn’t lived there for five years. He also made the accusation that Mr. Garrard has more than one residence and that he has only returned to his residence in Molena to run for office. He even alleged that Mr. Garrard did not run for office in 2012 because he did not meet the residency requirements at that time to run for office.
Mr. Adams cited O.C.G.A. § 21-2-217 in his challenge which lays out rules for determining residence as follows (from http://www.lexisnexis.com):
(a) In determining the residence of a person desiring to register to vote or to qualify to run for elective office, the following rules shall be followed so far as they are applicable:
(1) The residence of any person shall be held to be in that place in which such person's habitation is fixed, without any present intention of removing therefrom;
(2) A person shall not be considered to have lost such person's residence who leaves such person's home and goes into another state or county or municipality in this state, for temporary purposes only, with the intention of returning, unless such person shall register to vote or perform other acts indicating a desire to change such person's citizenship and residence;
(3) A person shall not be considered to have gained a residence in any county or municipality of this state into which such person has come for temporary purposes only without the intention of making such county or municipality such person's permanent place of abode;
(4) If a person removes to another state with the intention of making it such person's residence, such person shall be considered to have lost such person's residence in this state;
(4.1) If a person removes to another county or municipality in this state with the intention of making it such person's residence, such person shall be considered to have lost such person's residence in the former county or municipality in this state;
(5) If a person removes to another state with the intention of remaining there an indefinite time and making such state such person's place of residence, such person shall be considered to have lost such person's residence in this state, notwithstanding that such person may intend to return at some indefinite future period;
(6) If a person removes to another county or municipality within this state with the intention of remaining there an indefinite time and making such other county or municipality such person's place of residence, such person shall be considered to have lost such person's residence in the former county or municipality, notwithstanding that such person may intend to return at some indefinite future period;
(7) The residence for voting purposes of a person shall not be required to be the same as the residence for voting purposes of his or her spouse;
(8) No person shall be deemed to have gained or lost a residence by reason of such person's presence or absence while enrolled as a student at any college, university, or other institution of learning in this state;
(9) The mere intention to acquire a new residence, without the fact of removal, shall avail nothing; neither shall the fact of removal without the intention;
(10) No member of the armed forces of the United States shall be deemed to have acquired a residence in this state by reason of being stationed on duty in this state;
(11) If a person removes to the District of Columbia or other federal territory, another state, or foreign country to engage in government service, such person shall not be considered to have lost such person's residence in this state during the period of such service; and the place where the person resided at the time of such person's removal shall be considered and held to be such person's place of residence;
(12) If a person is adjudged mentally ill and is committed to an institution for the mentally ill, such person shall not be considered to have gained a residence in the county in which the institution to which such person is committed is located;
(13) If a person goes into another state and while there exercises the right of a citizen by voting, such person shall be considered to have lost such person's residence in this state;
(14) The specific address in the county or municipality in which a person has declared a homestead exemption, if a homestead exemption has been claimed, shall be deemed the person's residence address; and
(15) For voter registration purposes, the board of registrars and, for candidacy residency purposes, the Secretary of State, election superintendent, or hearing officer may consider evidence of where the person receives significant mail such as personal bills and any other evidence that indicates where the person resides.
(b) In determining a voter's qualification to register and vote, the registrars to whom such application is made shall consider, in addition to the applicant's expressed intent, any relevant circumstances determining the applicant's residence. The registrars taking such registration may consider the applicant's financial independence, business pursuits, employment, income sources, residence for income tax purposes, age, marital status, residence of parents, spouse, and children, if any, leaseholds, sites of personal and real property owned by the applicant, motor vehicle and other personal property registration, and other such factors that the registrars may reasonably deem necessary to determine the qualification of an applicant to vote in a primary or election. The decision of the registrars to whom such application is made shall be presumptive evidence of a person's residence for voting purposes.
O.C.G.A. § 21-2-6(b) specifies that a challenge for a candidate’s eligibility must be made within two weeks after the deadline for qualifying to Probate Judge Lynn Brandenburg who presides over elections in Pike County. Judge Brandenburg listened to the arguments from Mr. Adams and advised that he was going to determine an answer to this question of residency on Friday because “there are $9,000 worth of ballots on order for the county”. Added 3.28.14: Pike County Times confirmed that this challenge was submitted by the two week deadline.
Mr. Adams did not bring any witnesses or witness statements but advised Judge Brandenburg that the fifteen rules above applied to this case and alleged that Mr. Garrard resides in Eatonton rather than the school board district in which Mr. Garrard has been serving since a ruling in Robert E. Adams, Jr., et. al. vs. Walter James “Jim” Brooks in August of 2013 resulted in Jim Brooks being evicted from the District 4 seat and Mr. Garrard being appointed to this seat by the Pike County Board of Education. Click here to read more about this court case. The read more about the two dismissed lawsuits prior to the successful one, Click here and click here.
The July 31, 2012 Primary results were as follows: Robert E. Adams, Jr. received 69 votes (10.66% of the vote), Walter James “Jim” Brooks received 245 votes (37.87% of the vote), Connie Green received 195 votes (30.14% of the vote) and Marty Wynn received 135 votes (20.87% of the vote). The Run off was held on August 21, 2012 on the Board of Education District 4 race between Jim Brooks and Connie Green in which Jim Brooks received 153 votes (56.88%) and Connie Green received 113 (42.01%) of the votes resulting in Jim Brooks being declared the winner of the race.
Mr. Garrard said that his residence in Molena has never changed. “I maintain it. I mow the grass. That’s where I live,” he said. He submitted tax bills, bank statements, health insurance bills, a motel bill that listed his residence, a gas bill, and property and car insurance bills that came to his home address. “I’m not disputing that this is being used as your address,” Mr. Adams advised as he challenged whether Mr. Garrard met the requirements for residency on his Main Street address.
Mr. Garrard then advised that this has been his residency for over twenty years, that he has rebuilt rooms and repainted it, and that he has never said to anyone that it wasn’t his residency. He said that the Eatonton house is his wife’s mother’s house that he bought and gave to his wife after she got cancer a few years ago. He said that he mows the grass there and he visits there, but that he has never lived anywhere except this residence on Main Street.
Voter Registrar Sandi Chamblin was sworn in and answered a series of questions asked of her by Judge Brandenburg. Is Mr. Garrard currently a registered voter? She advised that he is and has been listed at this Main Street address since February 8, 1988. Does he currently reside in School District 4? Yes. Did he reside there before the line change? Yes.
Mr. Adams was also given the opportunity to ask questions to Voter Registrar Chamblin. What is your definition of reside? She answered that according to the Secretary of State it is where you are registered to vote. “You can own property all over the country but where you lay your head at night is where you reside,” she said. Mr. Garrard had no questions for her.
In his closing statement, Mr. Adams said that the state has made very clear what the rules are for determining where one’s residence is and that a homestead exemption is not the only determining factor according to state code. “He doesn’t meet the rules,” he said.
In his closing statement, Mr. Garrard said that he has property in his name in Pike County and that has been his residence since 1988. “I stay in that house and I sleep in that house,” he said.
Judge Brandenburg ruled that Mr. Garrard meets the statutory requirements of living in the district that he qualified to run for election. He said that address proofs and billing statements show this and that no evidence was shown that he lives anywhere else.
Mr. Adams asked for a copy of the transcript for Friday’s hearing immediately after the ruling and advised that he plans to appeal this ruling.