Washoe County Commissioner Mike Clark Cites Conflict of Interest, Abstains From Certifying 2024 Election

The majority of Washoe County commissioners certified the 2024 election in a 3-1 vote, with Commissioner Mike Clark citing a conflict of interest as reason he would abstain from voting. He was not present when the vote was taken after a brief recess for legal counsel to review Clark’s conflict of interest claim.

Chairwoman Alexis Hill and Commissioners Mariluz Garcia and Clara Andriola voted in favor. Commissioner Jeanne Herman voted “no,” mirroring her prior votes to not certify elections.

Before Clark’s announcement that he would abstain, he asked numerous questions related to a letter between County manager Eric Brown and former interim Registrar of Voters (ROV) Cari-Ann Burgess which revealed that nearly 29,000 registered voters were not designated as inactive as per the  deadline established by federal statute (90 days prior to an election). Therefore, nearly 29,000 ballots were mailed to inactive voters.

When Clark began to question Election Specialist Addie Vetter about these voters, ballots and the missed deadline, Chairwoman Hill interrupted Clark and warned him that he was accusing the ROV staff of wrong doing, to which Clark replied: “Quit interrupting me. I am not accusing anyone. If a question is raised, you always have to censor speech. That is not going to happen with me. I want to know why the County Manager had this information and this information wasn’t shared with me until today. Why wasn’t this done by the federal statutory deadline? If you think me asking a question is an accusation, well then I have to ask, what are you hiding? Were you aware of this letter, Ms. Hill? Were you aware of Manager Brown’s concerns on October 4th? 

Chairwoman Hill declined to answer.

Without answers to his many questions challenging the integrity of the general election in Washoe County, Clark issued the following statement and left the building during the brief legal recess. Returning from recess, Chairwoman Hill stated she wanted the record to reflect that Commissioner Clark “stormed out of the building.”

Good morning,

As you know, my name is Commissioner Mike Clark, District 2. I would like to start by expressing my thanks to staff and all volunteers who facilitated the November 2024 general election. Though we may not all agree with the results presented today, without your hard work and effort we would not have been able to complete the 2024 general election.

Many of you may not know that I started out my career as a bike courier and worked my way up to become a business owner. As a business owner, when I saw that my politicians weren’t representing the interests of me and my employees, I ran for office and worked very hard to implement changes to help people in the community. Regardless of whether I agreed or disagreed with someone’s position, I still had a job to do and did it. That type of leadership comes from the top down.

Sadly, not every person in a position of power agrees with me. During the certification process of the primary election, I was called an “election denier” for raising valid concerns with our voting system. However, as an elected official—no, as an American, it is our duty to preserve and protect fairness and transparency of every election and to support the men and women who make it happen. I speak today to apologize to Washoe County because we did not do our duty.

Since the primary election, our county enacted a new voting system. Instead of allowing our Interim Registrar of Voters to implement the system in the little time that was available to the office, our executive staff placed ridiculous demands on her that are now being “investigated” after she was forced to take personal leave, and told she could not talk to staff, the media or county commissioners. After her health privacy was violated when a text message from County Manager Brown was disclosed to the press, the Interim ROV was told that she cannot come back to work based on an agreement that never occurred. When she finally came forward to the press, she was miraculously put on administrative leave, at the same time our County Manager went on medical leave for a planned surgery during the election. We had no leadership during the election, and that is on us as commissioners for letting that happen.

What I am most concerned about is the fact that now we are facing an employment lawsuit, while so many members of Washoe County have reported:

1.      That they received multiple mail in ballots to their home and office addresses;

2.      That a text message and post card was sent out from the Nevada Secretary of State to all driver’s license holders, including non-citizens telling them to “register and vote”;

3.      That after being directed to develop chain of custody forms for local parishes at the direction of County Manager Brown, that the chain of custody forms were not followed;

4.      That 28,954 address verification cards were not designated as inactive;

5.      That apartments were flagged as “commercial” so apartment dwellers did not receive ballots;

6.      That individuals were refused the opportunity to vote because they could not verify their precinct number;

7. Despite the signature verification process, individual’s original driver’s license signatures were used as the valid signature;

8. That despite being in the statutory timetable, people’s ballots were rejected and unable to be cured due to the ROV not having enough staff;

9. To my knowledge, the county never completed a full front end to back end mock election nor addressed the issues raised with the new voting system before one of our leading tech staff members walked out of the job; but

10.  Somehow with all of these issues we have record breaking voter turnout.

I am not an election denier, and clearly, the person I wanted to win the presidency won our state. However, that does not mean that all protocols were followed and that we can truly certify this election with all the errors I have listed. In my opinion, and based on the information I received, not every vote counted.  For that reason, I respectfully request that we separately note any and all clerical errors discovered pursuant to NRS 293.387(2)(a).

Further, based upon the issues I have stated and the fact that our Interim Voter Registrar and I utilize the same attorney, I believe it is a conflict of interest for me to vote on this certification. As such, I must abstain from the vote.

Vetter confirmed that 20,864 ballots were returned by the post office as “undeliverable.” It is not yet known how many, or if any of those ballots were sent to the 28,954 voters. The Globe has asked the county for the data.

Vetter also confirmed that 1034 uncured ballots were not signature verified and not tabulated, with over 6,352 mail ballots adjudicated. In order to reduce the amount of adjudication done by county staff, Vetter said the county’s goal is to “educate the public and enhance the instruction provided” to the voter. “Our goal is to count as many votes as we can,” Vetter noted.

The county did not implement the Automatic Signature Verification system for the new mail sorters. Vetter believes that the system will be updated for ASV prior to the next election. The county manually verified signatures which was cause for concern to many constituents in the gallery. Every signature was verified by one person, Vetter confirmed.

A voter from Incline Village stated that when she returned her updated signature verification card in the mail, she was assigned an additional voter ID number. She questioned why she now has two voter ID numbers and if other voters who verified their signatures were also issued an additional number. She asked that the commissioners not certify the election.

Many constituents against the certification raised concerns that their ballot was received but not tabulated. Vetter noted that all the ballots received will be shown as tabulated once the election is certified. “Our source of truth is our voter registration system,” Vetter said, “No voter was disenfranchised.”