Pin It
Favorite

Trial to determine election recount requester's debt payment begins 

San Miguel resident Darcia Stebbens sat alone in the San Luis Obispo Superior Court on Dec. 4.

Representing herself, she's appealing an August 2023 small claims court decision in favor of the SLO County-Clerk Recorder's Office. A year after requesting a manual recount of the 2nd District Supervisor race between Bruce Gibson and Bruce Jones, Stebbens still hasn't paid the full cost of the recount process.

click to enlarge REPEATED REFUSAL Darcia Stebbens disputes an approximately $5,000 balance remaining from the 2nd District Supervisor race recount process. - FILE PHOTO BY PETER JOHNSON
  • File Photo By Peter Johnson
  • REPEATED REFUSAL Darcia Stebbens disputes an approximately $5,000 balance remaining from the 2nd District Supervisor race recount process.

That December morning marked the first day of the trial de novo hearing, in which presiding Judge Rita Federman will decide if Stebbens must pay the remaining $4,448.21. The trial de novo process considers the conflict as though the facts and issues of the case haven't been discussed before.

Opening on a contentious note, Deputy County Counsel Ann Duggan, who represents County Clerk-Recorder Elaina Cano, told Federman that Stebbens made a remark to county staff a few days ago while delivering some documents pertaining to the trial.

"[She said], 'Don't worry, there's no white substance in there,'" Duggan said. "Election workers across the state are subjected to threats."

Stebbens claimed that she was familiar with the two staff members she spoke to, adding that she's "never, ever had an instance" where she was disrespectful or threatening to them.

Court documents stated that the recount started on Dec. 19, 2022, and ended nine days later when Stebbens requested to terminate efforts. On each day of the recount, the County Clerk-Recorder's Office gave Stebbens and estimate of the costs for the day, which she paid.

In January, the office sent her the final bill of $7,367, which exceeded the deposits Stebbens made on the estimated costs of the recount. In February, Stebbens emailed the County-Clerk Recorder's Office saying she had submitted a payment earlier that day.

"Prior to sending the email, [Stebbens] had come into the [County-Clerk Recorder's] office and submitted a check for $2,918.92, with no explanation as to what this partial payment signified," the County Clerk-Recorder's documents on the appeal read.

Duggan opened her statements on Dec. 4 by bringing Cano to the witness stand. After laying out her office's recount practices, the county-clerk recorder revealed that Stebbens didn't respond to the county counsel's email in February that demanded the remaining $4,448.21 balance.

According to documents that Stebbens submitted in the appeal, she disputes the small claims court decision for five reasons. She alleged that Cano's small claims court action against her in May took place in the wrong jurisdiction. California's small claims courts allow people to sue for up to $10,000. Stebbens claimed that even though Cano sued her for less than that, the small court jurisdiction should be questioned because the full recount cost was $53,346.

"[Stebbens] had already paid a total of $45,979.46 during the recount process and made an additional good faith payment of $2,918.92 for total payments amounting to $48,898.38, which should be credited to the total account stated," her brief read.

Stebbens also refused to pay the balance because of Cano's alleged "refusal" to give her a detailed invoice breaking down the costs of her first deposit; because "relevant materials" that she requested before or during the recount process allegedly weren't produced; because the County Clerk-Recorder's Office allegedly misinterpreted the California Elections Code and Regulations; and because of alleged "excessive and inconsistent billing practices."

"This is not a contractual matter," Deputy County Counsel Duggan said at the trial. "She essentially owes a statutory cost. This is not a breach of contract. The amount under issue falls under the jurisdiction of the small claims court."

Duggan concluded her questioning of Cano on Dec. 4. Stebbens will cross-examine her on Dec. 7 and told the judge she'd bring witnesses of her own. Δ

Tags:

Pin It
Favorite

Comments

Showing 1-1 of 1

Add a comment

 
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-1 of 1

Add a comment

Search, Find, Enjoy

Submit an event