SLO County prosecutor looks into increased ballot count
December 7, 2022
By KAREN VELIE
The San Luis Obispo County District Attorney’s Public Integrity Unit conducted an inquiry into concerns about the County Clerk-Recorder reporting an additional 332 provisional ballots several weeks after the election. In response, Clerk-Recorder Elaina Cano promptly explained it was human error, according to a county press release.
On Nov. 29, a federal law enforcement agency sent a written referral alleging potential election crimes occurring during the counting of ballots to the District Attorney’s Office.
The referral raised questions about an unexplained increase of more than 300 provisional ballots that were announced when the clerk’s office updated the public after counting ballots on Nov. 23. The referral alleged that election observers were “sent home” and it was while no observers were present that the additional 300 or more provisional ballots were “found.”
In response to the inquiry, Cano explained the apparent discrepancy between the two reported totals of provisional ballots as an error when using a spreadsheet to total the ballots.
“The provisional ballot envelopes received by all county precincts on election night were counted, reported and their numbers were included on an excel spreadsheet utilized by my office to report the estimated figures to the Secretary of State (SOS),” Cano Reported. “However, at the time of the first report to the SOS, the excel spreadsheet did not generate ‘totals’ for the provisional ballots for precinct numbers 101-123 and 201-220, respectively, which cumulatively equaled 327 provisional ballots. Consequently, when my office reported the estimate of total unprocessed provisional ballots to the SOS on the second day after the election, the provisional ballots for the referenced precincts were not included in that estimate.
“When the results of the election were updated on November 23, the provisional ballot totals for precincts 101-123 and 201-220 were captured and included in the ‘estimated’ numbers provided to the SOS on that same day.”
The District Attorney’s Public Integrity Unit did not find evidence that would contradict Cano’s explanation, according to a press release. It recommends full transparency about the facts and process when questions are raised in order to ensure the public trust in local elections.
“The District Attorney’s Office Public Integrity Unit’s primary goal is to increase the public’s level of trust and confidence in local government and elected and appointed officials through investigative oversight and enforcement when evidence is sufficient for prosecution,” according to the press release.
The comments below represent the opinion of the writer and do not represent the views or policies of CalCoastNews.com. Please address the Policies, events and arguments, not the person. Constructive debate is good; mockery, taunting, and name calling is not. Comment Guidelines