Darcia Stebbens—the San Miguel resident sued by the San Luis Obispo County-Clerk Recorder’s Office for not paying the balance stemming from her requested manual recount of the 2nd District Supervisor race—clinched victory in her trial over the bill.
On Jan. 30, SLO County Superior Court Judge Rita Federman issued a written verdict on the trial de novo case that concluded more a month ago. While she found several elements to be reasonable—like the amount of time billed and total cost for attorney services, costs incurred for work performed by line staff members, and time billed to address Stebbens’ request for additional election materials—Federman questioned the extended hours worked by salaried staff.
“The clerk-recorder and the salaried staff members were not paid overtime or any additional compensation for the extended hours they worked,” the judge wrote. “There was no evidence of any other costs incurred by the county for these extended hours. Thus, it is not possible to conclude that the county incurred any ‘actual costs’ for this additional time.”
The written verdict cites “actual cost” to mean the amount that could have only been incurred through the election recount request. The overtime hours refer to the time County-Clerk Recorder Cano and other officials worked on the recount during a week-long clerk’ conference in Sacramento in December 2022. Federman added that she didn’t find Deputy Director Clerk-Recorder Melanie Foster’s testimony about those costs to be persuasive enough and ordered the time billed for those hours to be deleted from the total $53,346 recount bill.
That reduces the actual recount costs by $5,088.27, which exceeds Stebbens’ $4,448.21 balance with the county.
Deputy County Counsel Ann Duggan, who represented County Clerk-Recorder Elaina Cano during the trial, told New Times on Jan. 31 that there are no further appeals to the small claims action but there are other ways to seek review of the ruling.
“Some of the amounts calculated by the court as excluded costs were costs actually incurred by the county in the form of compensation paid to salaried employees who worked on the recount,” she said. “Salaried employees do not have defined working hours and, therefore, any time spent by employees on the recount and coded to the recount via the county’s payroll system—where compensation was paid by the county to the employees for that time not in excess of 40 hours—should be recoverable as ‘actual costs.'”
Duggan added that there wasn’t any testimony at the hearing that indicated a salaried employee couldn’t code and be compensated for a 10- to 12-hour workday as long as the time coded for the week didn’t surpass the usual 40 hours.
“The effect of the ruling is to have the taxpayers of the county pay for a portion of the recount that Ms. Stebbens requested,” she said.
Cano told New Times on Jan. 31 that she respected the court and its authority, though she disagreed with the judge’s interpretation of the extended hours billed for salaried staff. The clerk-recorder will be consulting further with county counsel to explore next steps and whether they actually owe Stebbens money based on the ruling.
“I was pleased to see that the court recognized and agreed with my arguments regarding the amount of time billed and the total cost for attorney services, and the costs incurred for work performed by line staff members,” Cano said. “Furthermore, the acknowledgment that the time billed for addressing Ms. Stebbens’ request for relevant material was properly billed is greatly appreciated.
“This aspect of the ruling reflects a thorough understanding and fair assessment of the matters at hand.”
Stebbens hung up on New Times when called for comment. Δ
This article appears in Feb 1-11, 2024.
I am glad to see this settled. While it is possible that a further review would result in compensation to the County for actual overtime paid, it is hard to imagine that the costs of such follow-up would be less than $5000. The principle that people demanding recounts be required to pay costs has been upheld.
“Partially prevailed” would be more accurate. While the County might get a review of costs related to overtime actually paid, I doubt that it would could be done for less than $5000. The principal that people requesting recounts should pay the costs has been upheld. The only thing is question was the precise amount.