Koeppen wins in Grant GOP court case

EPHRATA — Grant County Superior Court Judge Tyson Hill ruled in favor of Andrew Koeppen in Grant County Superior Court, indicating that Koeppen, not David Hunt, is the rightful chairperson of the Grant County Republican Party.

“This situation is an unfortunate one,” Hill wrote in his decision. “The Grant County Republican Central Committee has a long history of electing its own leaders through respectful civil interaction. However, beginning in October of 2023, a power struggle fractured the GCRP into two camps.”  

One camp favored Koeppen and the other, Hunt. Multiple attempts to recall Hunt had led to Hunt shutting down party meetings and eventually, the state party stepped in and suggested, on the advice of the Washington GOP’s attorney, that an election be held to select a party chair. Within that, it was suggested that only elected precinct committee officers, or PCOs, be allowed to vote in that election.  

Hunt refused to allow the meeting to verify or remove him as chair to go on as suggested and eventually, Ephrata Police Department officers were called to the Timeout Pizza in Ephrata to keep the peace. Hunt and his supporters left the meeting.  

At the time, Hunt said all PCOs should be allowed to vote, regardless of whether they were appointed or elected.  

In his decision, Hill disagreed. The decision indicates that Hunt appointed about 20 PCOs with only three of them being undisputedly legitimate. Hill cited GCRP bylaws and state law as part of the guidelines for his decision and indicated that only the three appointments Hunt made to replace members who left or passed away were legitimate, with 16 appointed to positions wherein no PCO had been elected.  

Because of the wording in the bylaws, only those appointed to replace PCOs who had been elected prior to their seat becoming vacant were valid.  

In a 16-0 vote, Hunt was removed from the party chair position. One of those votes was invalidated because the PCO was not certified, but 15 PCOs, given the size of the official PCO pool, did meet the requirement for a quorum, Hill found. 

PCOs had expressed concern about Hunt’s legal history including a domestic violence case currently being addressed in Grant County courts.  

Hunt’s argument in court is that he had the right under state law during his time as the GCRP chair to appoint the PCOs which would have numbered more than 40. 

However, Hill found that the local bylaws were more restrictive than state law and that local laws being stricter make it so the GCRP chair can only appoint to positions wherein a PCO has moved or resigned — not ones that were vacant due to nobody being elected to the position.  

Hill further cited cases wherein similar bylaws overrode statute in both the state and U.S. Supreme Courts.  

In court, Hunt also indicated that there has been precedent for GCRP chairpersons to appoint PCOs in the past.  

Hill acknowledged that, but indicated in his finding that such things become invalid once disputed, in which case the bylaws are again the rule to follow. Since objections were raised relating to appointed PCOs participating in the meeting in which Koeppen was elected and Hunt ousted, those PCOs should not have been allowed to participate in the election, he ruled.  

Additionally, the bylaws indicate that “only duly elected PCOs shall be entitled to vote at or participate in the Organization Meeting” — one wherein the leadership is ordinarily selected. They may also not appoint PCOs between the primary election and the meeting to decide leadership so that only duly elected PCOs can vote. 

“Common sense supports limiting the right to vote to elected PCOs as a check on the previous Chair’s ability to stack the vote in his or her favor,” Hill wrote in his decision. “The potential for abuse is obvious, particularly where, as here, there were more vacancies than elected PCOs after the August primary. Whether good intended or not, Hunt’s possible appointment of 25% of the total PCOs after he became aware there was a movement to replace him, demonstrates the potential for abuse this type of power could hold.”  

Hunt, former GCRP Treasurer Dan DeLano and former GCRP Secretary Carla Urias — now a member of the Moses Lake School District Board of Directors — have been ordered to provide Koeppen and his party officers with all GCRP records such as bank accounts, bank statements, funds on deposit and other appropriate items by this Friday.  

Hunt did file a request for Hill to reverse his decision Aug. 5, but Hill declined. In that decision, Hill indicated that the GCRP bylaws either were too vague or did not agree with Hunt’s assertions in his request for a reversal or that the information in the reversal was inaccurate.  

“The court sincerely hopes the parties (in this case) can move past this dispute,” Hill wrote in his response to Hunt’s reversal request. “In a few months, there will be a new Organization Meeting and the elected PCOs will have an opportunity to vote on its leadership and, hopefully, update and clarify the Bylaws.”  

Koeppen said he is relieved the court case is over and that the GCRP will focus on moving forward. The organization must review the financial statements and accounts the defendants in the case have been ordered to turn over for irregularities. 

“We’re going to investigate to see if there was any misappropriation of funds and supplies and equipment. We’re just going to continue on and hold accountable those who misuse our funds,” he said.  

GCRP Secretary Candace Erickson said the party will be focusing on community engagement in the coming months.  

“We’re moving forward because we’ve got the fair coming up and then we’ve got an old-time rally on Sept. 21,” she said. 

Koeppen and Erickson said they appreciated the support of party members during the last several months since the dispute over leadership arose. Attendance at party meetings is up, Koeppen said, with more than 40 people at the last general meeting.  

“We had a packed room in the middle of summer at our general meeting, and that just shows how strong this party is,” Koeppen said.  

Case information: 

Any reader who would like to review full court files associated with this report may request a copy by filling out the Superior Court records request form located at https://bit.ly/GCCRTRCDS. The case number for this issue is 24-2-00534-13. Assistance may also be obtained by phone by calling 509-754-2011, ext. 2800.