The Oconee County Board of Elections and Registration spent 90 minutes at the beginning of the month reviewing on a case-by-case basis challenges to the ability of 75 registered Oconee County voters to cast a ballot for the Nov. 5 election.
After reviewing each of the challenges made by Oconee County residents Victoria Cruz and Stephen Aleshire, the Board voted to sustain the challenge in 66 of those cases.
The Board determined that it found “probable cause” to challenge the voters and scheduled a hearing for 5:30 on Thursday (Oct. 24) to give those challenged an opportunity to come forward to dispute the Board’s decision.
Whether that hearing will be held, however, will depend on a ruling by Oconee County Superior Court Judge Lisa Lott on Monday (Oct. 21)
Judge Lott has scheduled a hearing for 2 p.m. at the Courthouse in Watkinsville on a request by Oconee County resident Susan Noakes that the Court enjoin Oconee County Board of Elections and Registration Chair Jay Hanley and Oconee County Director of Elections and Registration Sharon Gregg from holding the hearing.
Noakes said she and other Oconee County voters will be “irreparably harmed” if the Board continues to consider challenges this late in the election cycle.
Board Of Elections Meeting
The Board, at its Oct. 1 meeting, reviewed nine different lists submitted by Cruz and Aleshire of Oconee County registered voters who the couple claim should not be allowed to vote in the Nov. 5 election because they are no longer eligible.
![]() |
Cruz and Aleshire 10/1/2024 |
Cruz and Aleshire provided evidence they had gathered that the challenged voters live elsewhere, based mostly on property and voting records.
The Board determined that three of the 75 persons on those lists already had been cancelled from the rolls by the county Elections and Registration staff through normal processes and that one was a duplicate. Aleshire withdrew the challenge to a fifth.
The Board decided not to challenge four of the voters because they did not find that there was probable cause to sustain the challenge.
All but one of the votes was unanimous among the four Board members.
Ken Davis, the Democratic Party representative on the Board, voted against one of the Board decisions that it found probable cause to sustain the challenge.
“I know we are not taking away their right (to vote),” Davis said, “but we are making it very hard for them to come in and vote.”
“A lot of people will get that (notice of a challenge) and say I’m not going, I don’t have time. I’m not going to mess with that. I just won’t vote. That is what I’m afraid of,” Davis said.
Noakes Claim
Noakes, in her claim filed against Hanley and Gregg, argued just that point.
“(V)oters added to the challenge list will be forced to submit affidavits and additional proof of their eligibility to vote in the days preceding an election when voters should instead have certainty of their registration status without having to take extra onerous steps to defend their right to vote during this critical period,” she stated.
Noakes filed her claim and request for injunctive relief on Oct. 4, or three days after the Board of Elections and Registration meeting.
“Indeed, the Board has recently considered and sustained challenges and placed dozens of voters in challenged status mere weeks before the General Elections,” she stated.
“The Board is set to meeting again on Oct. 24, 2024, days before the General Election, to consider more challenges,” the suit notes.
Noakes had successfully asked Judge Lott to allow her to intervene as a defendant in a suit filed by Suzannah Heimel against Hanley and Gregg requesting that they hold hearings on registration challenges and seeking to halt voter registration in Oconee County until those hearings had been held.
Judge Lott dismissed that request by Heimel on Oct. 7 and scheduled the hearing for Monday on the cross-claim by Noakes.
Noakes filed a claim against her fellow defendants, Hanley and Gregg, in her Oct. 4 request that the Court dismiss the Heimel request because of the harm it would do to her as an Oconee County resident.
Public Comments
Cruz, Aleshire, and Noakes all addressed the Board at the beginning of the Oct. 1 meeting.
![]() |
Noakes 10/1/2024 |
“So this is a widespread problem,” Cruz said. “It really is only what I’m trying to do which is remove people that we know have moved out of this jurisdiction. Who are registered to vote most times in other jurisdictions and have their right to vote.”
“Nobody is taking the right of these citizens to vote. They have simply moved...or died,” she said, “and yet counties are refusing to remove them.”
“There is a secret communication system going on” at the State Election Board and the Secretary of State,” Aleshire said.
“Victoria and I, as alluded to, challenged registrations on several occasions,” he said. “And you know this openly. We are aware that the Secretary of State’s personnel...have said just to cool it. Every two years we’ll clean up the registrations and so forth. This is contrary to the law.”
Noakes said her comments were based on a statement prepared by the American Civil Liberties Union.
“The National Voter Registration Act prohibits systematic removal of voters within 90 days of an election,” she said. “We're now within 36 days of the November election."
“Challenges based on database and spreadsheet matching without personal individualized knowledge pertaining to the challenge, which results in removals, is systematic and not proper at this point in the election cycle,” she said.
At the beginning of the hearing on Oct. 1, the Board acknowledged that it already had challenged 28 voters for whom it had ruled earlier there was probable cause. Those voters had been notified of the challenge and had not come forward to dispute it, Hanley and Gregg said.
Video
The video below is of the Oct. 1 meeting of the Board of Elections and Registration. The meeting took place at the county Administrative Building north of Watkinsville.
Harold Thompson recorded the video for me
The room in the county Administrative Building is small, and I had asked Thompson to focus the camera on the audience rather than on the Board members, since those from the audience addressing the Board do so from their seats.
Cruz began her comments at 1:12 in the video.
Aleshire spoke at 4:24.
Noakes began speaking at 6:26 in the video.
The Board began reviewing challenges filed by Cruz and Aleshire at 14:06 and continued until 1:28:51 in the video.
2 comments:
Why does Noakes want ineligible voters to be able to cast a ballot? How is she or other Oconee County voters going to be harmed by removing invalid registrations? To quote y’all’s illustrious leader, “Come on man!”
Stephen Aleshire: By Law there are no more challenges (OCG 229 and 239), so the Court Hearing is already "moot", but when did that ever get in the way of lawfare attorneys? The Superior Court hearing will prevent the challenged electors (voters) from coming forward to claim their right to vote in Oconee County (most are already registered and voting in another jurisdiction including another state). In effect, the court itself, under Judge Lott, is itself disenfranchising these voters, and further diluting the effect of local valid votes cast.
Post a Comment