Stephen Bright admits he left his voter registration in Maumelle after moving to Little Rock. Records show he later voted in a Maumelle-only election deciding how the city would spend property-tax revenue. Bright calls it an “oversight.”
Stephen Bright, a former State Rep and current SOS employee, is the Republican candidate for House District 71. His Democratic opponent, Cassandra Mayes, recently raised questions about his voting history, alleging that he may have committed voter fraud.
Last week, Mayes provided KATV with records indicating a discrepancy between where Bright was registered to vote and where he was living at the time. The records highlight that Bright voted in 7 Maumelle elections between 2009 and 2015, including a special election, despite physically living in Little Rock. Mayes argued this is “something you just cannot do.”
But under Arkansas law, it’s complicated.
Mayes provided KATV with voting, police, and property records. Bright’s voting history indicates that he voted with his Maumelle registration those seven times; Little Rock Police Department reports from that period, however, list a Little Rock address as Bright’s residence. Court records also show that his Maumelle property was foreclosed on in 2008. Together, these records indicate a real discrepancy between where Bright was living and where he remained registered to vote.
What Bright Says
Bright admitted that his voter registration remained in Maumelle despite moving from Maumelle to Little Rock. He claimed it was a “simple oversight” and stated he ultimately returned to Maumelle.
The question is not whether Bright lived in Little Rock while remaining registered to vote in Maumelle — he admits this. The question is whether living in Little Rock at the time meant Maumelle was no longer his legal voting location, whether Bright knew this or not. That distinction separates simple oversight from voter fraud.
Let’s talk about intent
Under Arkansas law §7-5-201, a person’s voting residence is their domicile. This is a place of fixed habitation, or where a person intends to return after being away. A person can only have one domicile at a time, and changing domiciles requires both abandoning the former domicile and intending to remain somewhere else.
So living somewhere else does not necessarily establish that a voter has changed their legal domicile. In this case, Bright’s move to Little Rock doesn’t determine his legal voting residence. Again, it’s critical as to whether or not Bright knew about domicile requirements. It’s about where he physically lived and what he intended his permanent residence to be at the time of voting.
What the Supreme Court says
In 1998 Jenkins v. Bogard case, the Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed that residency depends on both a person’s statements and their conduct. A voter has to actually abandon the former domicile and intend to not return while actually living in another place with the intent to make that your permanent home.
So here’s the question that needs answering: Was Maumelle Bright’s permanent home during the time in question or did he abandon his Maumelle home to establish a new one in Little Rock?
Why it matters
Bright was not new to government or Maumelle politics when these votes occurred. Before the period in question, Bright had already served as Maumelle City Director, Mayor of Maumelle, and as a member of the Arkansas House of Representatives — roles that gave him direct exposure to municipal government, electoral districts, residency requirements, and the rules governing who is entitled to vote where. That experience matters when considering his characterization of the discrepancy as “a simple oversight.”
Here’s where it gets sticky for Bright: Arkansas election law §7-1-103 prohibits a person from voting while knowing they are not entitled to vote.
Little Rock and Maumelle may both be in Pulaski County, but they are separate municipalities. If Little Rock had become Bright’s legal domicile, why did he vote in a Maumelle special election? On what basis did he consider himself eligible to vote in a Maumelle-only election to determine how Maumelle property tax revenue would be spent?
Again, Bright is not a political novice, so it would be hard for him to argue that voting in a Maumelle election was an oversight. We simply do not know his intent — that’s for a judge or jury to decide if someone decides to file suit.
Let us know what you think.
