Records Show NC Auditor's Staff Urged County Boards on Early-Voting Sites; Watchdog Asks Elections Board to Subpoena Ex-Liaison
American Oversight released texts from former auditor's-office elections liaison Dallas Woodhouse and asked the State Board of Elections to subpoena him, weeks after the board's Republican majority rejected a similar request 3-2.
A Text From a State Auditor's Aide, and a Vote It Landed Before
The morning of June 2, 2026, Jackson County's elections board chair got a text from Dallas Woodhouse, the North Carolina state auditor's newly appointed elections liaison. It read: "Don't let them have a vote." Hours later, the board took up whether to keep an early-voting site at Western Carolina University, which had run since 2016 across five general elections and four primaries[2][10].
That text is now at the center of a fight over what a state auditor's office can say to the county officials it appoints. On Friday, Aug. 14, 2026, the watchdog group American Oversight released letters asking North Carolina's State Board of Elections to subpoena Woodhouse and asking both the elections board and the auditor's office to recover text messages he deleted[1]. It's the second attempt at a subpoena. The board's Republican majority already rejected one in July, 3-2, along party lines[3].
Both sides agree the texts exist and that some were deleted. What they disagree on is whether any of it was against the rules.
How One Office Got the Power to Talk to County Boards at All
None of this could have happened before December 2024. That's when North Carolina's Republican-led legislature passed Senate Bill 382, which moved appointment power over the State Board of Elections from the Democratic governor to the Republican state auditor[4]. It was a first-of-its-kind setup — no other state hands election-board appointments to an auditor.
Auditor Dave Boliek used that new power to create a job: "elections liaison." He gave it to Dallas Woodhouse, the former executive director of the North Carolina Republican Party, and described him as his "eyes and ears on the ground in the elections process"[4]. Because the arrangement was brand new, nobody had written rules for how much contact was appropriate between the auditor's office and the county chairs it now appointed.
That gap is why both sides are fighting so hard over this one case. Whichever way it resolves — through the elections board, the courts, or simple precedent — will likely set the norm for how the next auditor uses the same power.
The Records Fight Behind the Records Fight
The story isn't only about what Woodhouse said. It's also about what he deleted, and who is supposed to notice.
The auditor's office released more than 100 pages of texts from Woodhouse's personal phone after public-records requests[1]. But the office's own general counsel wrote that Woodhouse deleted messages that were covered by those requests, doing so "in direct contravention" of the Office of the State Auditor's policy, after he'd already been told to preserve them[1][6]. The office says some texts were never even backed up to his iCloud account, so they may be gone for good[1].
Woodhouse was moved off the liaison job in early July and resigned about a week later. Because he's no longer a state employee, the office says it can't reach his personal phone or accounts anymore[1][5][14]. That's the practical reason American Oversight wants a subpoena: without one, nobody outside Woodhouse himself has any way to get at what's missing[1][3].
American Oversight's executive director, Chioma Chukwu, put the group's case plainly: "The BOE and OSA must act immediately to recover the public records Dallas Woodhouse deleted and hold him accountable for destroying them"[1]. A subpoena is the tool that would let investigators compel testimony now that voluntary cooperation has ended.
Two Ways to Read the Same Statute
Boliek's defense doesn't dispute that the texts happened. It rests on what the law actually says. "There's nothing in the statute that says the auditor cannot communicate with people that he appoints," he has said, adding that the conduct was "nothing nefarious"[4][9]. On his account, the liaison job was always meant to be temporary — a bridge for new county chairs still learning a brand-new chain of command — and it ended because that transition period, covering a municipal election, a primary, and most of the 2026 general-election early-voting plans, had simply run its course[5][9]. He's also argued the complaints are partisan on their face: "It shouldn't be a shock that Democrat activists complain about actions of majority Republican boards"[9].
Critics don't read "Don't let them have a vote" as routine constituent service. To them, an official who appoints county board chairs telling one of those chairs how to vote isn't answering a question — it's directing an outcome[2]. Records also show Woodhouse advised county board members on how to remove elections directors, including sending a petition template to state elections director Sam Hayes[7]. Supporters of that advice counter that pointing officials toward a formal petition process is steering them toward the lawful channel, not around it.
Underneath the disagreement sits a basic asymmetry in power. Democrats hold only two of the five State Board of Elections seats, so they can't subpoena anyone without at least one Republican vote — and they don't have one[3]. Public-records requests are the one tool that doesn't require a majority, which is part of why this fight has moved from board votes to records law.
What the Texts Were Reportedly About
The subpoena fight is downstream of a bigger dispute over which early-voting options counties keep. Sunday voting and campus sites are the two most used by Black voters and by college students, and both have been shrinking[11]. The number of counties offering Sunday early voting fell from 29 in 2022 to 20 in 2026, as nine counties voted to drop it[11]. Guilford County separately declined to adopt sites at N.C. A&T and UNC Greensboro[13].
The Western Carolina University site removal is the clearest single data point. The State Board of Elections voted 3-2 to eliminate a site that had operated continuously since 2016[10]. Advocates for campus and Sunday voting argue these aren't marginal conveniences — they're the access points closest to where many eligible voters without cars actually live. County officials who voted to cut them have generally pointed to cost, staffing, and turnout per dollar spent, arguing that a site serving a narrow group for a few days isn't always worth the budget.
None of that is settled by the subpoena question. Woodhouse no longer works for the state, the liaison position has been eliminated, and most county voting plans for November 2026 are already locked in[1][5]. Whatever the elections board decides about a subpoena won't change this year's site list — it will only determine how much of the record behind it becomes public.
Where Coverage Split, and What's Still Open
Outlets covering the story split largely along the same partisan lines as the dispute itself. Carolina Journal, published by the free-market John Locke Foundation, framed Woodhouse's exit as a scheduled wind-down and left out both the deleted texts and the "Don't let them have a vote" message[5]. Democracy Docket, founded by Democratic election lawyer Marc Elias, went further the other direction, describing a "top-down campaign" as established fact rather than an inference from the texts[10]. NC Newsline, WRAL, and NBC News fell in between, generally including both the documentary evidence and Boliek's statutory defense, though NC Newsline's headlines at times stated motive — "looked to boost GOP turnout" — as settled rather than inferred[2][3][4]. No outside-the-U.S. or non-Western outlet has meaningfully covered the story; it has stayed an entirely domestic dispute[1].
No court has ruled on any of this, and no criminal charge has been filed[1]. What remains open is whether the State Board of Elections — or a future vote, if the political math on the board shifts — will ever get a chance to put Woodhouse under oath, and whether the deleted texts are recoverable at all.
Summary
North Carolina's Republican State Auditor, Dave Boliek, created a job called "elections liaison" after a December 2024 law moved control of the state elections board from the Democratic governor to his office[4]. He gave the job to Dallas Woodhouse, the former executive director of the state Republican Party[4]. Text messages from Woodhouse's personal phone, released by the auditor's office under public-records requests, show him and other staff talking with county elections officials about those counties' early-voting plans[1][2].
On Friday, Aug. 14, 2026, the watchdog group American Oversight released letters it sent to the auditor's office and to the State Board of Elections[1]. The group asked the board to subpoena Woodhouse and asked both agencies to recover text messages he deleted[1]. The auditor's own general counsel had already told the group that Woodhouse deleted messages covered by records requests, and did so "in direct contravention of OSA (Office of the State Auditor) policy," after being told to preserve them[1][6]. The office released more than 100 pages of his texts, but said some were never backed up to or pulled from his iCloud account[1]. Because Woodhouse resigned in July, the office says it no longer has access to his personal phone or accounts[1][14].
This is the second push for a subpoena. In July, Democratic members of the State Board of Elections asked the board to compel Woodhouse to testify. The board's three Republicans voted no, and the request failed 3-2 on party lines[3].
The core dispute is not whether the texts exist — both sides accept that they do. It is whether an auditor may lobby the county boards his office helps oversee. Boliek says he broke no rule: "There's nothing in the statute that says the auditor cannot communicate with people that he appoints," and he has called the complaints partisan[4][9]. Critics say the content crosses a line — for example, Woodhouse texted a county board chair "Don't let them have a vote" hours before a vote on a campus early-voting site[2]. Underneath sits a second fight over the deleted texts and what North Carolina's public-records law requires.
The Event
On Friday, Aug. 14, 2026, American Oversight made public letters it had sent to the North Carolina Office of the State Auditor and the State Board of Elections[1]. The letters ask the elections board to subpoena former auditor's-office elections liaison Dallas Woodhouse and ask both agencies to recover text messages he deleted[1]. They follow the auditor's office's release of more than 100 pages of texts from Woodhouse's personal phone, and a letter from the office's general counsel saying Woodhouse deleted messages subject to records requests in contravention of office policy[1][6]. Woodhouse was moved off the liaison job in early July and resigned about a week later; the State Board of Elections had already voted 3-2 against subpoenaing him[3][5][14].
Undisputed Facts
- Senate Bill 382, passed by the Republican-led legislature in December 2024, shifted power over the State Board of Elections from North Carolina's Democratic governor to the Republican state auditor[4].
- Auditor Dave Boliek created an "elections liaison" position and hired Dallas Woodhouse, former executive director of the North Carolina Republican Party, describing him as his "eyes and ears on the ground in the elections process"[4].
- The auditor's office released more than 100 pages of text messages taken from Woodhouse's personal phone in response to public-records requests[1].
- The auditor's office's general counsel wrote that Woodhouse deleted messages that were subject to records requests, "in direct contravention" of office policy, after being told to preserve them[1][6].
- The auditor's office says it cannot retrieve any remaining records because Woodhouse resigned and it no longer has access to his personal devices or accounts[1].
- In a message the morning before a Jackson County vote on an early-voting site at Western Carolina University, Woodhouse texted the county board chair, "Don't let them have a vote"[2].
- In July 2026, the State Board of Elections voted 3-2 along party lines against subpoenaing Woodhouse; all three Republican members voted no[3].
- The number of North Carolina counties offering Sunday early voting fell from 29 in 2022 to 20 in 2026, with nine counties voting to end it[11].
- The State Board of Elections voted 3-2 to remove the early-voting site at Western Carolina University, which had hosted voting since 2016 across five general elections and four primaries[10].
- Woodhouse was reassigned off the liaison role in early July 2026 and resigned from the auditor's office about a week later[5][14].
The Pressure
Strip away the moralizing and blame. What structural realities persist regardless of which narrative wins?
- A new chain of command with no rulebook
- Senate Bill 382 moved elections-board appointments from the governor to the auditor in December 2024 — a first-of-its-kind arrangement[4]. Nobody has written the norms yet for how much an auditor may talk to the county chairs he appoints. Both sides are fighting to set that precedent now, before it hardens[4][9].
- Marginal-state math
- North Carolina decides statewide races by very small margins. Sunday hours and campus sites disproportionately serve Black and student voters[11]. So a handful of site decisions in a handful of counties is a real, if small, turnout lever — which is why both parties treat routine-sounding scheduling votes as high stakes.
- Records law as the only lever the minority has
- Democrats hold two of five seats on the State Board and cannot subpoena anyone alone[3]. Public-records requests are the one tool that works without a majority. That is why the fight has migrated from the elections board to the records law, and why the deletion allegation matters more than its dry procedural sound[1][6].
Material realityRegardless of who wins the argument, the operational facts are fixed for now. County early-voting plans for November 2026 are largely set[5]. Sunday voting is offered in 20 counties, down from 29 in 2022[11]. The Western Carolina University site is gone by a 3-2 state board vote, and Guilford County declined sites at N.C. A&T and UNC Greensboro[10][13]. Woodhouse no longer works for the state, the liaison position no longer exists, and the auditor's office says it cannot reach his personal phone[1][5]. Some texts have been released; an unknown number are deleted and may not be recoverable[1]. No court has ruled on any of it, and no criminal charge has been filed.
Narrative as a weaponThree actors are actively shaping how this reads. American Oversight, a liberal-aligned records litigation group, wants you to see a cover-up: it timed its letters to the deletion admission and centers the destroyed texts, because destroyed evidence is a cleaner story than contested lobbying. Boliek's office wants you to see a lawful officeholder talking to his own appointees, plus one staffer who broke an internal policy on his own — hence the emphasis on 'nothing nefarious,' the statute, and the fact that the office's own lawyer disclosed the deletions. Voting-access groups and Democratic-aligned outlets want you to see the site and Sunday-hour cuts as the point and the texts as the proof of intent; the auditor's side wants those treated as ordinary county budget decisions that happen to have upset one party. Notably absent is any outside-U.S. narrative — no foreign outlet is meaningfully covering this, so the framing contest is entirely domestic.
How Each Side Sees It
Each major actor’s view — how it frames things, its underlying incentive, and how it’s materially affected. Tap a side to read it.
Frames it asBoliek's case rests on plain statutory text. The legislature handed his office the power to appoint county elections board chairs, so talking to those appointees is part of the job, not an abuse of it: "There's nothing in the statute that says the auditor cannot communicate with people that he appoints or she appoints"[4]. He describes the liaison role as a transition helper — someone to answer questions from new chairs while a brand-new chain of command took hold — and says it was "always something we thought would be temporary"[9][5]. On the substance, he calls the conduct "nothing nefarious" and the criticism predictable partisanship: "It shouldn't be a shock that Democrat activists complain about actions of majority Republican boards"[9]. His office also points to its own compliance record: it released more than 100 pages of texts from a private phone and its general counsel, not a critic, is the one who documented the deletions[1][6].
WhyBoliek is a first-term Republican statewide official who inherited a large new power just before a midterm. He needs the new system to look competent and lawful, and he needs the story to be about one departed staffer rather than about the office itself[5][9].
Impact on themThe office has spent weeks in a public-records fight, lost the aide, and eliminated the position[5][6]. If the elections board or a court finds records were unlawfully destroyed on its watch, the fallout lands on the office, not on Woodhouse alone[1].
Frames it asWoodhouse's defenders cast him as a political professional doing openly political advocacy in a job that was never billed as neutral. Boliek hired him as a partisan operator and said so publicly, so arguing with county chairs about site choices is the job description, not a secret plot[4]. Advising board members on the process for removing an elections director — including sending a petition to state director Sam Hayes — is, on this view, pointing officials toward the lawful, on-the-record channel rather than around it[7]. On the texts, he has not been charged with anything; the deletion is so far an internal policy finding by his former employer, not a court ruling[1][6].
WhyHe is a career Republican operative whose value comes from being effective for his side. Testifying under oath about private texts carries legal risk and no upside for him[3].
Impact on themHe lost the job and is now the named target of a subpoena request and of the records-destruction allegation[1][3].
Frames it asTheir argument is about accountability and evidence, not policy preferences. First: public business is public, even on a personal phone. If a state employee can delete texts and then quit, the records law becomes optional — "The BOE and OSA must act immediately to recover the public records Dallas Woodhouse deleted and hold him accountable for destroying them," said Executive Director Chioma Chukwu[1]. Second: the auditor's office only went looking for more texts after news reports showed they existed, which they say shows the searches were not good-faith[1]. Third, on substance: an official who appoints county board chairs telling one of them "Don't let them have a vote" is not answering a question — it is directing an outcome[2]. They also point to records showing Woodhouse coached members on firing elections directors[7]. A subpoena, they argue, is the only tool left because voluntary cooperation ended when he resigned[1][3].
WhyAmerican Oversight is a liberal-aligned nonprofit built to use records law against Republican administrations; its influence depends on producing documents that move institutions. Democratic board members are in the minority and cannot compel anything without at least one Republican vote[1][3].
Impact on themThey have already lost one 3-2 vote and have no power to force a second[3]. Their leverage is publicity and, potentially, litigation under the public-records act.
Frames it asThis group's concern is concrete access, not process. Sunday voting and campus sites are the two options most used by Black voters and by students, and both are shrinking: Sunday voting fell from 29 counties in 2022 to 20 in 2026[11], and the state board voted 3-2 to strip a Western Carolina University site that had operated since 2016[10]. Guilford County declined sites at N.C. A&T and UNC Greensboro[13]. Advocates argue that a campus site is not a favor but a match to where thousands of eligible voters live without cars. Republicans on those boards argue the opposite way: sites should be judged on cost, turnout per dollar, parking and staffing, and a county with limited money should not fund a site that serves one narrow group for a few days.
WhyCounty board members are appointed, not elected, and now answer up a chain that runs to the auditor. Voter-access groups need visible, countable losses to sustain pressure and litigation[10][13].
Impact on themStudents in affected counties must travel off campus to vote early; some have sued over the lack of campus sites[10]. Turnout effects in November are unknown and contested.
Like this article?
The Bias Ledger average rating 5.3
The same story, as framed by outlets across the spectrum, ordered least to most biased. The bias score (1 = straight, 10 = heavily spun) is an AI assessment of that framing — click an outlet to see its track record. The tell is the word choice or omission that reveals the angle.
| Outlet | Vantage | Bias | How they frame it | The tell |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WRAL | U.S. center (Raleigh commercial TV) | 3 | "Democrats on NC Elections Board call for investigation into recently resigned staffer" and "Former NCGOP boss taken off election oversight duties ahead of midterm elections" | Attributes the demand to the party making it and leads with the vote rather than a characterization. 'Ahead of midterm elections' in the second headline adds a timing frame the story does not need. |
| NBC News | U.S. center-left | 4 | "How an under-the-radar GOP official is shaping local voting plans in North Carolina" | 'Under-the-radar' implies concealment before any evidence of it is presented. The reporting itself is detailed and includes Boliek's statutory defense in his own words. |
| theGrio | U.S. left (Black-audience outlet) | 5 | "North Carolina Republicans move to reduce Sunday and campus early voting" | Headline is a plain statement of the votes taken, but frames the story around racial impact throughout; the counties' stated cost-and-turnout reasons get little space. |
| NC Newsline | U.S. left (nonprofit, States Newsroom network) | 6 | "NC Auditor Boliek expressed polling site preferences and looked to boost GOP turnout, messages show" and "NC auditor's liaison advised county elections board members on how to fire directors" | Strong original documentary reporting, but headlines state motive ('looked to boost GOP turnout') as established fact rather than as an inference from texts. Boliek's statutory defense appears late or not at all. |
| Carolina Journal | U.S. right (published by the John Locke Foundation) | 6 | "Boliek reassigns election liaison, citing county chair effort winding down" | Frames a departure amid a records scandal as a scheduled wind-down, and sources the reason to the auditor's own explanation. The deleted texts and the 'Don't let them have a vote' message are absent. |
| Democracy Docket | U.S. left (founded by Democratic election lawyer Marc Elias) | 8 | "North Carolina GOP mounts top-down campaign to block campus voting sites" | Asserts a coordinated 'campaign' as the headline fact, and the site's surrounding tags use 'voter suppression' as a category label rather than an attributed claim. |
References
- New records reveal efforts by North Carolina auditor's office to sway county early voting decisions — American Oversight · Liberal-aligned nonprofit records-litigation group; founded 2017 to pursue FOIA actions against Republican administrations
- NC Auditor Boliek expressed polling site preferences and looked to boost GOP turnout, messages show — NC Newsline · Nonprofit newsroom in the progressive States Newsroom network
- Democrats on NC Elections Board call for investigation into recently resigned staffer — WRAL · Commercial Raleigh TV station; mainstream state political reporting
- How an under-the-radar GOP official is shaping local voting plans in North Carolina — NBC News · U.S. network news, center-left editorial tilt
- Boliek reassigns election liaison, citing county chair effort winding down — Carolina Journal · Published by the John Locke Foundation, a conservative/free-market NC think tank
- NC auditor's office in public records fight over Dallas Woodhouse's work — NC Newsline · Nonprofit newsroom in the progressive States Newsroom network
- NC auditor's liaison advised county elections board members on how to fire directors — NC Newsline · Nonprofit newsroom in the progressive States Newsroom network
- North Carolina Auditor's Response Raises Questions About Whether Woodhouse Withheld Election-Related Texts — American Oversight · Liberal-aligned nonprofit records-litigation group
- North Carolina auditor defends ex-elections liaison accused of inappropriately influencing county election officials — FOX8 WGHP · Nexstar-owned local TV affiliate; conventional local news framing despite the Fox network brand
- Amid new GOP-led restrictions, North Carolina students lead a fight to vote during the midterm primary — Democracy Docket · Founded and run by Democratic election lawyer Marc Elias; explicitly pro-Democratic voting-rights advocacy
- North Carolina Republicans move to reduce Sunday and campus early voting — theGrio · Black-audience U.S. outlet, left-leaning editorial perspective
- NC counties are dropping Sundays from early voting plans — NC Newsline · Nonprofit newsroom in the progressive States Newsroom network
- Guilford Board of Elections declines to adopt 2026 early voting sites at NC A&T, UNC Greensboro — NC Newsline · Nonprofit newsroom in the progressive States Newsroom network
- Former NCGOP director resigns from 'elections liaison' role in state auditor's office — WUNC · NPR member station licensed to UNC-Chapel Hill; public radio, center to center-left