A week after the Washoe County Commission made national headlines for refusing to certify the results of a primary election recount, commissioners reversed course and approved them Tuesday.
Washoe County Commissioner Clara Andriola, a Republican who was appointed by Gov. Joe Lombardo to the board last year, initially voted against the certification last week, citing “a lot of hiccups” with the process. Facing backlash and guidance from state officials and the district attorney’s office, Andriola requested the reconsideration.
She and Commissioner Mike Clark, a Republican, joined the board’s two Democrats to certify the recount results in a 4-1 decision late Tuesday.
Andriola, reading from prepared remarks, said she met with the interim registrar's office and her previous concerns had been addressed. Andriola added that the district attorney's office had provided clarifying direction on the nature of her duties as commissioner to canvass the election returns, making it clear to her that the “action is ministerial only and required.”
“It is my crystal clear understanding that canvassing elections, whether it's a primary, general or a recount, as defined in statute, is a legal duty and affords no discretionary provision to refuse,” Andriola said during the meeting. “In America, Nevada and right here in Washoe County, we can and must do everything we can to restore faith and confidence in our elections.”
Clark said he received similar guidance from the district attorney's and attorney general's offices that certifying the vote was a mandatory ministerial function, and that he could otherwise face criminal prosecution. He added that he was “forced to vote to certify this election” even though he views it as “nonsensical.”
“There is nothing in the statute that allows a commissioner to question the validity of the results, whether there was any irregularity in the recount,” Clark said. “I must follow the law.”
Voting rights advocates and several state officials have criticized the county’s decision not to certify the recount results as an act that could fuel the election denialism movement.
The recounts stem from the state’s June 11 primary election. Three losing candidates requested a recount in their races, which were paid for by far-right provocateur Robert Beadles, who spent about $150,000 to fund the recounts (one of which was canceled after a candidate withdrew her request ).
The recount results did not change the outcome of any of the races, but under Nevada law the results still needed to be certified within five working days of the recount’s completion. This “canvassing” of votes — the process of declaring, examining and certifying election results — has historically been noncontroversial, but election conspiracy theorists have sought to hijack the typically ministerial process as a way of casting doubt and holding up election results.
The lone commissioner who voted in opposition Tuesday — Jeanne Herman, a Republican — said she would not vote to certify the recount results because of unspecified reports of fraud she’s heard. Herman did not provide proof of her claims.
“There are hills to climb on, and there's hills to die on. This might be one of those,” Herman said. “I cannot vote for this.”
Herman and Clark are connected to Beadles, who participated in a protest of about 30 people before the meeting and testified during public comment, which included nearly 90 public commenters during the almost seven-hour meeting. Beadles and other protesters shared unfounded claims of election fraud during the meeting, criticized the county’s election processes and called on commissioners to hand count the primary ballots even though state law stipulates recounts must be conducted in the same manner as the original election.
Read More: Washoe County commissioners vote not to certify primary election recounts
The Tuesday vote followed a petition filed by Attorney General Aaron Ford on behalf of Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar requesting the Nevada Supreme Court to compel the board to act to certify the results. Last week, Aguilar called the decision not to certify the recount “unacceptable.”
In a statement emailed late Tuesday, a spokesperson for the secretary of state’s office celebrated the certification of the vote, but said it does not address the underlying legal question sent to the Nevada Supreme Court — the “appropriate place to resolve the issue.”
“Washoe County’s initial decision not to canvass the election results could have consequences in Nevada, and across the country, if this issue is not addressed appropriately,” she wrote.
The Supreme Court has not yet weighed in on the matter.
The decision not to certify the election results marked Washoe as the third county in a battleground state to do so this election cycle. The other two counties were Delta County, Michigan , and Fulton County, Georgia .
Nevada Administrative Code outlines counties' statutory obligation to certify election results, specifying that any election recount “must be canvassed within 5 working days after the completion of the recount.”
The Washoe County District Attorney’s Office did not respond to a request for comment about the certification taking place on the ninth business day after the recount finished. Mary Kandaras, the Washoe County chief deputy district attorney, told commissioners ahead of the vote that the board does not have any investigatory power and must canvass the vote.
“As many people have noted, the commissioners were told that they should vote their conscience,” Kandaras said. “And, well, generally, that is true in almost every vote; it's not true in the case of the canvass."
Athar Haseebullah, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada, said that though Nevada law clearly states that counties must certify the votes, the consequences of not doing so must be clarified. He warned that if the court system does not offer clarification, other counties could follow suit.
“I'm expecting, as part of the election denialism movement, that there are going to be at least a few county commissions statewide that will end up obfuscating and rejecting existing law and simply moving toward noncertification as a means of holding up the election,” Haseebullah said.
This story was updated on 7/16/2024 at 7:39 p.m. to include a statement from the secretary of state’s office.
Most Popular
Comments / 0