SLO County woman owes $4,448 for election recount. Will court let her off the hook?
A San Miguel resident who owes the San Luis Obispo County Clerk-Recorder’s Office $4,448 after objecting to the full bill for a Board of Supervisors ballot recount will find out soon how much she’ll have to pay.
After two days of testimony that concluded Monday, a court commissioner will weigh both sides and determine who should cover the remaining cost.
As the person who requested the recount, Darcia Stebbens is required by state law to cover the full cost of the recount, which was $53,346 for the District 2 race won by Bruce Gibson. She paid the majority of it, before questioning the fairness of the remaining sum.
County Clerk-Recorder Elaina Cano then sued Stebbens in small claims court for the balance.
On Friday and Monday, Cano and Stebbens met at the Grover Beach branch of the San Luis Obispo County Superior Court to present their arguments to Commissioner Leslie Kraut.
Stebbens disagreed with paying three charges: hours worked by county counsel, benefits packages of employees working on the recount, and printed copies of recount guidelines supplied to staff and observers.
Cano, however, said the county would not have incurred those three costs if Stebbens hadn’t requested the recount — so they are Stebbens’ responsibility to pay.
By Wednesday, Aug. 30, Kraut will decide how much of the remaining balance Stebbens is required by law to pay.
Kraut said that her jurisdiction is “limited” in small claims court, as her job is to decide if the clerk-recorder’s recount charges are justified by the law, nothing more.
“It’s a statutory right and obligation for the elections official to conduct the recount as they see fit,” Kraut said on Monday. “If there’s a statute supporting their right to carry the recount the way that they want, I can’t rewrite that statue.”
What happened during the recount?
On Dec. 12, about a week after the November election was finalized, Stebbens requested a recount for the District 2 supervisor race.
Incumbent Bruce Gibson defeated Templeton resident Bruce Jones for the seat by 13 votes, according to the certified election results.
The recount started on Dec. 19 at 10 a.m. when Stebbens paid the county $16,995. The sum covered estimated costs for preparing the recount and the first day’s tasks.
Each morning, the county charged Stebbens the estimated cost of the day’s recount work, including time spent sorting and counting ballots, hiring security, and printing physical materials, Cano said.
According to Cano, “the daily estimated cost fluctuated” based on staff duties and number of staff needed per activity.
Stebbens ended the manual recount early on Dec. 29 after election staff had tallied about 20% of the ballots. By then, she had paid the county $45,979.
How much has SLO County woman paid for the recount?
When the recount ended, the county tallied all actual costs that weren’t included in the estimated costs, and informed Stebbens that she owed another $7,367, Cano said.
Cano sent Stebbens a detailed list of the costs she was charged for the recount, including physical materials and a breakdown of hours worked by staff.
Jan. 25 was the county’s original deadline for recount reimbursement. When Stebbens didn’t pay, the county extended the deadline to Feb. 3, when Stebbens paid the county another $2,918, according to Cano.
The remaining $4,448 didn’t pencil out, according to Stebbens’ own calculations of staff and material costs, she told the Tribune.
The county gave Stebbens another chance to pay the remaining balance on Feb. 23. Stebbens refused, and Cano filed a lawsuit on May 1 to recover the remaining funds.
Stebbens argues for lower bill in court
On Monday, Stebbens told the commissioner that she shouldn’t have to reimburse the county for printing 1,360 pages of its recount guidelines because she didn’t ask the county to create it.
Cano, however, said that code section 20831(b) of the California Code of Regulations requires the county to provide copies of recount regulations and procedures to staff, the requestor, observers and any other interested parties before the start of the manual tally.
Cano also cited code section 20815(e), which states that “all actual costs of the recount that would not have been incurred but for the requestor’s particular recount request” must be reimbursed by the requestor.
The county wouldn’t have needed to print recount guidelines if Stebbens hadn’t requested the recount, so Stebbens should cover the cost, Cano said.
“It is my responsibility to make sure that those who attend are informed,” Cano said in court on July 14. “I would never had made all those copies just to keep in the office.”
Stebbens also argued that she shouldn’t pay the County Counsel’s Office for the hours they worked.
According to Stebbens, advising the County Clerk-Recorder’s Office is part of the county counsel’s job description.
“To me that is their normal course of business,” Stebbens said, so the county should fund their hours.
As a result, Stebbens said she shouldn’t have to fund their time. She said that charging every possible cost to the requestor is cost-prohibitive and discourages voters from requesting recounts.
“I believe that (the costs) were excessive,” Stebbens said. “And they used costs to stop the recount.”
“That may be a feeling you have,” Kraut said. “But I don’t know that I can consider that.”
Cano, however, said that specific tasks performed by county counsel were related to the recount.
“It was necessary at times to seek legal advice based on the issues that Ms. Stebbens raised and challenged each day, which included broad requests for relevant material,” Cano wrote in an email to the Tribune on July 28.
“The cost is as necessary as ‘security guard hours,’ to ensure the safety and security of the recount rooms and those present in the recount rooms,” Cano wrote in the email. “If we are challenged as to what we are legally required to do, then election staff needs a lawyer to provide that advice.”
On Monday, Cano shared California Code of Regulations section 20818(d), which says that the election official can decide if they need more staff and materials to run the recount.
“I do have the authority to determine how we would like the best way to proceed with a recount process,” Cano said.
Finally, Stebbens urged the commissioner to exempt her from paying for the benefits packages of recount staff.
Stebbens said she’s willing to pay for staff’s hourly work on the recount, but the county is responsible for funding pension and health care packages no matter what work they do during the day, so she shouldn’t have to cover it as the requestor, Stebbens said.
Kraut, however, said that benefits are considered part of an employee’s compensation package, which the employer is responsible for.
“Aren’t you their employer at the time?” Kraut asked Stebbens in court on July 14. “They’re working for you that day.”
Cano said that the county considers “actual costs” for staff time to include hourly wages and benefits.
This story was originally published August 1, 2023 at 8:00 AM.
