By Daniel Bendtsen
Laramie Boomerang
Via Wyoming News Exchange
LARAMIE — Laramie attorney Michael Pearce, who represents Taylor Haynes in the fight over the gubernatorial candidate’s eligibility, is contending Secretary of State Ed Buchanan’s request to remove Haynes from ballots is a threat to voters’ democratic choice.
“Removing (Haynes) from the ballot will violate a cornerstone of American political structure,” Pearce says in a Tuesday court filing.
Buchanan is asking the Laramie County District Court to give him the explicit power to remove Haynes’ name from the ballot even though his office has already submitted a list of candidates to county clerks.
Pearce argues creating such authority should not be the court’s responsibility and said the race has already been “poisoned” by the dispute.
“This is a statutory matter that can be resolved by the Legislature adding provision to the statutes that gives the Secretary of State the power to remove candidates after the ballot has been printed,” Pearce writes. “However, the Secretary of State also has the duty to vet nominations prior to printing the ballot, which should catch situations like what is alleged here. … If the state does not check the nominations prior to putting them on the ballot, it is the Secretary of State who causes the problems, not the nominee.”
Because the state has already given candidates’ names to clerks, Buchanan doesn’t have “the authority to declare (Haynes) ineligible to be governor if elected,” Pearce said.
“The ballot is likely already able to be contested as a result of this action by the state, which has in and of itself caused confusion in the process,” Pearce said. “What happens to the votes that were cast in favor of Dr. Haynes and do the people that voted for him have an opportunity to recast their vote for another candidate? This seems to bring questions as to the validity of the entire vote.”
The Wyoming Constitution requires all gubernatorial candidates to live in the state for five years immediately preceding the election.
In arguing Haynes does not qualify to be governor, Attorney General Peter Michael noted the Republican used his ranch home — which straddles the Wyoming-Colorado border — as his registered addressed for voting in 2014.
While the state found the ranch’s actual house lies in Colorado, Pearce said the property should still qualify as a Wyoming residence, even though Haynes does not use the property as his primary residence.
Before Albany County Clerk Jackie Gonzalez told Haynes in 2014 his ranch home was not a Wyoming address, others residents of that property had voted in Wyoming.
During the period the state said Haynes lived in Colorado, Pearce said Haynes also kept a separate Wyoming residence.
From 2013-2016, Haynes said he spent most of his time at a house on Grand Avenue. From October 2016-October 2017, he said he spent most of his time at a house on Yellowstone Road in Cheyenne. Since July, he has leased a housed on Alsop Lane in Laramie.
When Haynes registered to run, he identified a commercial property on South Third Street as his residence.
When the Secretary of State’s office began questioning Haynes’ residency, Pearce said Haynes and his wife had used “the back half of this building and the basement as a residence with beds and other residential furniture, and operated the business in the separate front office space.”
Wyoming statute defines a residence as “the place where a person has a current habitation and to which, whenever he is absent, he has the intention of returning.”
The full rule includes four references to the word “intent” and Pearce argues “intention is a large part of the determination of residence.”
It’s obvious Haynes hasn’t intended to establish Colorado residency, Pearce said.
“The mailbox to the ranch, it should be noted, is in Wyoming,” Pearce said. “Everything pertaining to the home in question is in Wyoming. All the services are provided in Wyoming, his driver’s license, income taxes, are all done through Wyoming. His shopping is done in Wyoming. He services his cars in Wyoming. There is no access to the ranch apart from Wyoming. This means too that the ranch avails itself of Wyoming and Albany County emergency services. He has never tried to register to vote in Colorado and has always voted in Wyoming. He has never done anything to separate himself from Wyoming or become a Colorado resident.”
Pearce argues Wyoming’s case law also indicates Haynes should be considered a Wyoming resident.
In 1970, the residence of a Wyoming legislator was contested. Rep. Dean Prosser claimed Laramie County residence while his house on his ranch — which straddled the county border — sat in Colorado.
Prosser was ultimately deemed eligible with the presiding judge saying Wyoming’s statute means residence is “not lost by removal to another state except with the intention of making that other state his residence.”
“To deprive this man of his right and claim to Wyoming as his true home and to deny those who elected him of their vote would be an invasion of every common sense by hypertechnical devices,” Judge John Raper said of the Prosser case.
And just as Pearce touted Haynes’ actions as being evidence of his Wyoming residence, Raper also noted in 1970 Prosser’s actions as evidence of his residency: He voted in Wyoming, he worked in Cheyenne, he paid taxes there, the mailing address was Cheyenne, his telephone number was Cheyenne, his children attended school in Cheyenne, he paid taxes to Laramie County, and he spent most of his time there.
A trial concerning Haynes’ eligibility is scheduled for 9 a.m. Tuesday.