Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Municipal Election Canvass topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Mobile City Council revokes vote to certify Aug. 20 municipal election, delays canvass

5749128 · September 3, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Mobile City Council voted to rescind an earlier action to declare results of the Aug. 20 municipal election after officials said the required public canvass was not completed; the item was held for consideration later in the meeting.

The Mobile City Council on Tuesday revoked a prior vote to declare the results of the Aug. 20 municipal election and set the canvass aside for later consideration after officials said a required, public canvass of provisional ballots had not occurred.

State law requires the council to publicly canvass municipal election results and record the number of votes each candidate received, a legal advisor told the council, and the Board of Registrars had not yet delivered provisional results needed to complete that ministerial task.

The council first moved to "declare the results of the August 20 municipal election" under Resolution 27 11 31. After a roll call in which several members voted yes and Councilman Carroll said he would abstain, council members and counsel raised procedural concerns about whether the canvass had been properly performed in public and whether provisional returns were available.

Doree Mayfield, a resident who spoke during the public-comment period, told the council she had reviewed the 2025 elections handbook and said it states voting locations cannot be moved within three months of an election. Mayfield also said the city moved the Dauphin Way Baptist polling place about six and a half weeks before the election and suggested that change disproportionately affected one candidate. "The change looks like it affected the person that the mayor was endorsing," Mayfield said. She cited vote totals she had seen and said the situation "just makes it look bad."

City staff responded that the change in precinct location was made for public-safety reasons. "Due to the fact that it was not with regard to parking, but regard to public safety ... the ingress and egress from Airport Boulevard would have caused a public safety hazard," the City Clerk said.

A legal advisor told the council, "State law requires the council to count the votes and say who got how many votes 1 week after the election. There's no discretion." After that exchange, a motion to reconsider the certification was made and approved, and the council voted to revoke the earlier certification. Council members then moved to take the canvass item out of order and hold it for consideration at the end of the meeting; the council recessed to follow those steps.

The council did not complete the public canvass during the session and said it was waiting for the Board of Registrars to deliver provisional results needed to finish the ministerial task of declaring winners or ordering runoffs. Counsel noted that if no candidate receives a majority in a given contest, state law requires the council to declare a runoff and set its date.

The episode prompted members to underscore that the canvass is a legal, ministerial duty rather than a discretionary vote. The council scheduled further action on the item after the registrar's office provides the outstanding provisional-ballot totals.

Ending: The council deferred final action on the Aug. 20 canvass until provisional results arrive from the Board of Registrars; no final winners were formally certified during the meeting.