HUNTINGTON, WV (WOWK) - Two soon-to-be Huntington City Council Members will get to keep the seats they won in the November election.
The wins of Jason Arthur and Stacy Jo Holley for Huntington City Council Districts One and Nine, respectively were challenged by their opponents. Sasha Chapman challenged Arthur's win on Dec. 2, and Carl Eastham challenged Holley's win on Dec. 3. In opening the special meeting, Councilmember and Chair Sarah Walling stated that this was unprecedented for the council.
The Huntington City Council and the challengers said those challenges were filed because Arthur and Holley missed a deadline to file their primary financial reports and secondary financial reports by the required deadline of 84 days before the general election, or Aug. 13, 2024. Arthur filed his missing reports on Oct. 31, and Holley filed hers on Nov. 1.
Chapman and Eastham's joint statement to the Council said that they expected Arthur and Holley to claim that they had not been told about the missing documents as an excuse and said they believed that was not good enough to excuse their "extreme negligence." Their statement questioned Arthur and Holley's ability to be trusted with the city and its budget if they could not correctly file those documents.
However, in the joint statement, Chapman and Eastham also admitted that they themselves also missed the deadline to file the primary financial report and were not notified of their mistake. Chapman and Eastham claimed that the difference was all of the financial information that would have been in that report was documented within their quarterly reports that were submitted on time.
The complaint also claimed that Holley's and Arthur's overdue reports were "grossly inaccurate."
It said that Holley's reports allegedly contained negative balances prohibited under campaign finance regulations, such as a negative balance of $419.76 in the first quarter report. Chapman and Eastham claimed that negative balances indicate unreported income, which violates campaign finance rules.
The challengers also claimed Arthur's campaign funds were used to "pay himself" as he was the only vendor listed on that report, alleging that he omitted vendors he used for campaign expenditures.
At the end of the statement, Chapman also spoke on her own behalf stating she believes there needs to be a change in the law because the current quarterly report system gives the secretary only a week to review hundreds of reports. Chapman claimed that the system is not fair to the secretary.
Both Arthur and Holley admitted in their responses that they did miss the deadline, and took corrective action to file the documents as soon as they realized the mistake on the dates listed above. They both thanked the voters of their districts for voting them to the Huntington City Council and said they are both committed to doing all they can to help the Huntington community grow and succeed.
The assistant county clerk acting as Cabell County's election official stated in an affidavit that she did not send either candidate a notice by certified mail of their missing documents, nor did she remove them from the ballot due to missing that deadline.
After hearing the challengers' joint statement and the responses from Arthur and Holly, the Council went into executive session for just over half an hour. They said they did not make any votes or final decisions in the session.
Once they returned from the executive session, the council voted on whether or not Arthur and Holley would keep their seats, voting seven in favor and one against. Three council members were absent from the meeting.
The Council said their decision was based on the fact that while West Virginia State Code §3-8-5a (1) does state a candidate who misses the deadline is to be disqualified and cannot appear on the general election ballot, there is a legislative rule that supersedes the code as it has the same effect of law as the code.
According to the Council, that rule, West Virginia CSR 153-51-1 sets forth additional requirements prior to disqualification. The rule created a requirement of notice to any candidate who has not filed any required campaign statement before they are disqualified. WV CSR 153-51-2.1 through 3.2.3 states that an election official was required to send them certified mail with a return receipt and any treasurer in their campaign informing them of the date it was due and warning them of disqualification. The candidate's party chair is also to receive a copy of that notice.
As stated in the affidavit from the assistant clerk, neither Holley nor Arthur received such notice. The council says because of this failure, disqualifying the candidates now, in December, would "amount to a deprivation of due process, both for the successful candidates and the executive committee." However, they also iterated that they are not condoning the failure to file reports on time.
Walling said that while they voted to allow Arthur and Holley to keep their seats, Chapman and Eastham were well within their rights to challenge and that in doing so, they gave the Council the opportunity to look into the law and procedures should anything need to be reviewed for changes.