Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves ROV budget for Sonoma‑Glen recall as residents press for 100% manual tally
Summary
Alameda County approved an estimated budget for a closure‑date recall election in the small Sonoma‑Glen School District despite multiple speakers asking for a 100% manual tally and detailed, itemized election cost breakdowns from the Registrar of Voters.
The Alameda County Board of Supervisors on June 18 voted to approve the Registrar of Voters’ budgetary estimates to run a standalone recall election for the Sonoma‑Glen School District and take related procedural steps. The vote followed extended public comment pressing for cost transparency and for a full manual recount option.
Multiple callers who identified themselves as local residents and school‑district officials urged the board to direct the ROV to perform a 100% manual tally or an additional manual verification for the recall. Linda Hurley, who said she is a Sonoma‑Glen school board member and a recall candidate, told the board the district had not received timely ROV budget details and requested a “100% manual tally to show good faith.” Other callers complained that a temporary 'ballot drop stop' (a mobile, staffed ballot‑drop tent) was being deployed in a very small community and argued the Voter’s Choice Act model produced outsized costs for small elections.
Registrar Tim Dupuis (as he identified himself to the board) and County Counsel answered questions on legal duties and procedure. Dupuis told supervisors the ROV’s published estimates are intended for budgeting and that the office would deliver an invoice of actual expenses to the school district after the election. He explained the county’s Voter’s Choice Act procedures, the reasons a small standalone election tends to incur higher per‑voter costs than a consolidated election, and that the ROV’s voter‑education and outreach program (including the temporary drop‑stop) is a separate, mandated activity and not billed to the district as part of the special‑election cost.
Dupuis said the county’s practice is to make cast‑vote records available on request after certification and noted pending state legislation (SB 1328) could change the rules around early release of cast‑vote records. He also said the ROV sometimes performs a 100% manual tally for very small elections when that is the most efficient way to meet audit obligations; that approach was used for a recent small Berkeley election, Dupuis said.
County Counsel and staff explained that state law requires a school district to pay the costs of conducting a recall election and that the ROV’s estimates meet statutory notice requirements for budgeting purposes. The board voted to approve the budget request and related items for the recall election with supervisors divided on some procedural questions but a majority consenting to the measures before them.
The recall election date was set for July 2; staff said the final, itemized bill will be compiled and submitted to the Sonoma‑Glen School District after the canvass is complete. Several speakers reiterated they would press for additional transparency and some asked supervisors to consider future changes in the county’s Voter’s Choice Act implementation for very small jurisdictions.
