Reno-area election certification rejection recount heads to Nevada Supreme Court

Top Nevada state officials harshly criticized the Washoe County Commission on Wednesday for voting against approving ballot totals in a recount of two primary races in the Reno-area county and petitioned the Nevada Supreme Court to force the board to certify the recounted election results.

“This week, three county commissioners refused to canvass accurate election results as required by law,” Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar said in a statement.

“This vote has the potential to set a dangerous precedent for elections in Nevada. It is unacceptable that any public officer would undermine the confidence of their voters.”

On Tuesday, Washoe County Commissioners Clara Andriola, Mike Clark and Jeanne Herman, all Republicans, voted against certifying — or canvassing — the results of a recount in two primary races, one for school board and the other for the commission itself.

Commissioners Alexis Hill and Mariluz Garcia, both Democrats, voted in favor of certifying the results reported by the county Registrar of Voters’ office.

Clark told the Reno Gazette Journal that he thought this criticism conflicts with legal advice given by Assistant District Attorney Nate Edwards to commissioners that they should “vote your conscience.”

“They told us we had to vote but also that we have to vote our conscience, so I followed the rules,” Clark said. “And now the rules have changed.”

The recounts were requested by school board candidate Paul White and commission candidate Mark Lawson, who is running to unseat Andriola.

They showed almost no change from the initial primary results . White and Lawson’s vote totals differed by only a single vote each. The results show White being more than 8,800 votes behind the top vote-getter in his race and Lawson about 1,700 behind in his.

A judge this week dismissed White’s demand for a hand recount , and Lawson’s similar legal action is still pending. Their attorney says a decision on whether to appeal the decision in White’s case is still under consideration.

More: In a first, Republican majority on a Nevada county commission refuses to certify election

What the petition to the Nevada Supreme Court says

The petition by Aguilar names Andriola, Clark and Herman as respondents and says that because the election implications are so severe, a swift resolution by the Nevada Supreme Court is warranted.

It is a “writ of mandamus.” This is a legal action that seeks to force a government entity to take a specific action, in this case to force the Washoe County Commission to certify the recount results.

See the full petition below.

“The Board appears to have departed from its mandatory duty based on vague, unsubstantiated allegations that Washoe County’s own election and recount processes were not trustworthy,” it says.

“These false allegations ignore clear statutory procedures that have long governed recounts and continue to ensure consistency, accuracy and finality in Nevada’s elections. The Board’s refusal to canvass threatens to harm the impacted candidates, the County’s voters, and public trust in our State’s elections and the dedicated workers and volunteers who make them possible.”

Canvass is the term used in Nevada law to refer to the act by which election results are reviewed, errors noted and the official results declared so that county election officials can then certify them.

Aguilar’s petition says that the failure to canvass the recount violates Nevada Administrative Code — rules and regulations for how government entities in the state should operate. It also says the Washoe County Commission did not meet its statutory obligations in Nevada law.

“The Board’s decision not to canvass implicates the November 2024 general election because it impacts which candidates appear on the general election ballot,” the petition says.

It goes on to say that the Washoe County Commission did not have an option to vote no.

“A writ of mandamus is appropriate here because the Board has a non-discretionary duty to canvass and certify the recount results under Nevada law, yet has failed to do so by its deadline of July 10, 2024.”

Advice from assistant district attorney on voting no

ADA Edwards, when asked Tuesday about the board not having a choice in how to vote, gave different advice.

“What I do think you have a duty to do is A) canvass the vote and B) to decide what the true results of the election are based on the evidence that you've been presented,” he said.

“So you don't have a duty to vote yes or no on a particular motion.”

He gave the example of a commissioner making a motion to certify results as true, but another commissioner not believing they are.

“You don't have to vote yes on that. You don't have to vote no. You vote your conscience,” Edwards told commissioners.

“I tell you guys that a lot. And I think that's what you do here today, you vote your conscience.”

Aguilar’s petition gives a different legal view.

“The Board has no legal basis to skirt its mandatory duty to complete the canvass, and therefore should be compelled to perform a canvass of the recount results,” it says.

Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford echoed this in a statement Wednesday.

“When the Board of Commissioners failed to perform its duty to certify the authenticated results of the recount, it failed to meet the expectation of Nevada voters that the election results would reflect the votes of the majority,” he said.

Washoe County Commissioner Mike Clark pushes back

Clark noted that Washoe County manager Eric Brown, who oversees the Registrar of Voters’ office, said last year of the county’s election system: “ Take it down to the studs and start over .”

“Eric Brown runs the sausage factory,” Clark said. “He's telling people when he says it needs to be torn down to the studs that there's something wrong with the sausage yet he still wants you to eat the sausage.”

Clark said it was disingenuous to say the commission is causing people to view the election system as unfair by its decision not to certify the recount results.

“The person who oversees the person who runs the election system tells the public that the system is flawed to the point where it needs to be torn down to the studs and that he has no faith in the system,” he said. “How dare they say that my vote causes the whole of Washoe County to not trust the system. How dare they.”

What’s next

The day after the commission vote, Andriola requested that it reconsider the matter at its next meeting, July 16.

Item 22 on the meeting’s agenda — released Thursday — is a “recommendation to declare canvass of the recount vote” and says, “Pursuant to (Nevada law), the Board is required to canvass the results of the recount.”

The first attempt at certifying the recount featured hours of public comment and was temporarily shut down at one point when manager Brown and his wife were personally criticized and profanity was used by candidate Drew Ribar.

Ribar has a petition before the Nevada Supreme Court seeking a new primary in his race after he and his opponent were left off sample ballots.

The July 16 meeting will likely feature even more drama.

Clark said he looks forward to it.

“I'm gonna have fun,” he said.

Aguilar vs. Washoe County Board of County Commissioners by Brett McGinness on Scribd

Mark Robison is the state politics reporter for the Reno Gazette Journal, with occasional forays into other topics. Email comments to mrobison@rgj.com

This article originally appeared on Reno Gazette Journal: Reno-area election certification rejection recount heads to Nevada Supreme Court