[Ed. note: Below is republished with permission from WHQR, a media partner of Port City Daily. It’s been updated since press to include response from the N.C. State Board of Elections.]
NEW HANOVER COUNTY — In the wake of confusion and frustration stemming from the local Board of Elections handling of absentee ballots, New Hanover County engaged the Parker Poe law firm to review the election offices’ financial needs, practices, and communications. The Board of Elections declined to participate for the time being; election officials say they weren’t consulted before the county hired the firm and are unsure if this review is within “the scope of the county’s authority.”
READ MORE: The ballot-counting snafu (The Dive)
New Hanover County has contracted with the Parker Poe law firm, authorizing up to $30,000 to fund a review of the New Hanover County Board of Elections, following confusion and frustration around its handling of absentee ballots. According to documents shared by the county, the firm was officially engaged about two weeks ago, prior to conversations with the state or local elections boards.
Last month, the local Board of Elections was criticized by county staff and several candidates for failing to follow a new state law requiring most absentee mail-in ballots received prior to Election Day to be counted and included in vote totals on Election night.
The elections board pushed back, saying it acted in accordance with state guidance, and that the accuracy and integrity of the ballot-counting process were never in question. Board Chair Derrick Miller also said he personally thought the elections office was underfunded, saying additional resources could have prevented the situation. The local elections board is an independent agency with a state-appointed board, but it is primarily funded by the county. It lacks its own legal counsel or communication team.
While the North Carolina State Board of Elections (NCSBE) defended the work of the local board and director Rae Hunter-Havens, it staunchly denied it had ever approved deviating from state law. Paul Cox, general counsel for NCSBE, stopped short of saying Hunter-Havens and her team did anything illegal, but confirmed they should have counted the ballots earlier, according to state statute.
County Manager Chris Coudriet told WHQR that the mail-in ballot problem was part of why the county decided to conduct a review of the local elections board’s operation, although other issues would be explored, as well.
“My decision to proceed with this review extends beyond the recent absentee ballot issue, although that was a significant concern confirmed by the State Board of Elections. We aim to evaluate resource needs, review practices and procedures, and identify opportunities to improve communication—specifically with candidates and voters,” Coudriet wrote in an email.
Communication, in particular, was a compounding factor in the ballot issue, adding to the confusion. Miller took some responsibility for this, acknowledging during a public meeting that he had directed Hunter-Havens to prioritize ballot tabulation and preparing for the canvass (when vote totals are finalized) over answering questions (including those from the press).
In an email sent Monday to county commissioners and top staff, including Hunter-Havens, Coudriet said he had shared his plan during a meeting with NCSBE, originally requested after the initial discovery of uncounted ballots in early November. According to Coudriet, NCSBE’s director and general counsel attended.
Coudriet wrote that state elections staff agreed that retaining a third-party firm to conduct a review of local operations was “a reasonable action to take,” with the caveat that it should “not be an audit of the election.”
In a statement, NCSBE offered qualified support for the idea if it were pursued cooperatively — but made it clear they were not asked for their approval.
“State Board staff members met with the county manager and others from his office this week. The county manager informed the State Board staff of the contract the county had signed with a law firm to conduct a review of county board operations. State Board staff were not asked for their approval of this contract. It had already been executed. State Board staff expressed how, if this review is conducted cooperatively with the county board of elections, then it could be beneficial,” a NSCBE spokesperson wrote in an email.
State officials also highlighted the independence of the local elections board, both under the law and in terms of potential influence from candidates — in this case, the elected county commissioners who are Coudriet’s only boss.
“State Board staff also reiterated the legal separation of duties between county government, which oversees the budget of the board of elections, and the county board and State Board which are charged by law with overseeing the conduct of elections. State Board staff are hopeful that the county manager approaches this engagement in the spirit of cooperation and with an appreciation for the legal authority of the county board of elections, and with a sensitivity to the fact that the county manager serves candidates for office, while the county boards operate independently of candidates,” the state spokesperson wrote.
Response from election officials
The New Hanover County Board of Elections is declining to participate for the time being, citing the ongoing recount process for the state Supreme Court race, and questions about Coudriet’s authority to conduct this type of review. Hunter-Havens has also questioned Coudriet’s assertion that NCSBE has signed off on the scope of the review as currently proposed.
Hunter-Havens confirmed that the Board of Elections had decided not to participate in the review process.
“Our board has chosen not to participate in this unsolicited review at this time. It was emphasized during our board meeting on Monday that the county board requires more time to analyze the scope and scale of this request with independent legal counsel before discussions begin,” Hunter-Havens wrote to WHQR in an email.
She also said NCSBE’s director and general counsel had “clearly stated to us that in their discussion with the county manager that an audit of the county board of elections operations by the county manager is beyond the scope of the county’s authority.”
She wrote that the Coudriet and state officials were giving her different ‘characterizations’ of the same conversation, and the local elections board needed to “look at that further.”
“It seems premature to say that the State Board agreed to this review, especially the scope of work detailed in the contract that the county drafted,” Hunter-Havens wrote.
In a letter to Coudriet, Miller wrote that the elections board is “mindful of our independent authority … and take our oversight duties seriously. We cannot allow unauthorized others to take them out of our hands.”
Miller noted that Coudriet had already established a contract and timeline prior to contacting the elections board.
“While we appreciate your helpful intention, we wish we had been consulted,” Miller wrote.
Miller added the board needed to seek additional guidance on how to proceed, but that process could be delayed by the recount process currently underway in the state Supreme Court race. Miller said the board would discuss it during their January meeting.
“While the New Hanover County Board of Elections will not be participating at this time in the third-party review that you have initiated, we remain interested in discussions of how the county can provide adequate funding and support for its operations consistent with the county’s statutory charge,” Miller wrote.
Coudriet said the elections board’s decision wouldn’t deter the review process.
“I understand, based on internal communication [Tuesday] morning, that the local Board of Elections has chosen not to participate at this time. Nonetheless, we are proceeding with the review. We have structured the scope of work to minimize reliance on their direct involvement but remain optimistic that the Board of Elections will recognize the value of this effort as it progresses and understand its intent to strengthen operations and resources moving forward,” Coudriet wrote in an email.
Why a third party?
The New Hanover County Board of Elections is one of several autonomous and semi-autonomous agencies, along with the Sheriff’s Office and Register of Deeds, that don’t fall under the county’s direct jurisdiction but are funded by the county.
It appears relatively uncommon for the county to engage a third party to review one of these agencies. Coudriet could not provide an example of it happening in recent history
However, Coudriet did cite the county’s partnership with Cansler Collaborative Resources (now CCR Consulting) to review the consolidation plan for the Public Health and Social Services departments in 2019.
“That review, like this one, provided an impartial assessment and actionable recommendations for improvement,” Coudriet wrote.
Asked why the county and elections board couldn’t handle an internal review without a third party, Coudriet wrote that, “while I could have utilized internal resources such as our Strategy Office or Internal Audit team, I believe, in this case, that an independent third party offers maximum objectivity.”
Contract details
According to documents provided by the county, on November 22 the Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP firm confirmed it had been engaged by the county.
In an email, Parker Poe wrote the scope of their work would include, “(1) a review of the County’s current election policies and procedures through interviews of County Board of Election Members and Staff and a review of documents as necessary; 2) an analysis of those policies and procedures in light of current statutory requirements and best practices; and 3) written recommendations related to any updates, changes, and additional resources needed to improve upon existing practices,”
Two ‘equity partners’ — charging $575-585 per hour, a “discount from [their] typical hourly rate” — and one associate — charging $410 per hour — will be working on the review. The contract is capped at $30,000, according to Coudriet, and will be funded by the county and overseen by the county’s chief financial officer, Eric Credle.
Coudriet promised the results would be transparent.
“Upon completion, the findings and recommendations will be shared with the Board of Elections, elections staff, and the public. Our ultimate goal, as the funding agency, is to ensure that elections in New Hanover County are conducted with the highest standards of transparency, efficiency, and trust,” he wrote.
Ben Schachtman is a journalist and news director with WHQR, with a focus on local government accountability. He began reporting for Port City Daily in the Wilmington area in 2016 and took over as managing editor there in 2018. He’s a graduate of Rutgers College and later received his MA from NYU and his PhD from SUNY-Stony Brook, both in English Literature. He loves spending time with his wife and playing rock’n’roll very loudly.
You can reach him at BSchachtman@whqr.org and find him on Twitter @Ben_Schachtman.
