Adams clerk faces recall after 2020 election controversy

By Sarah Katherine Sisk Collegian Reporter

Adams Township Clerk Stephanie Scott and Adams Township Supervisor

Mark Nichols are facing a recall election, after a petition stemming from 2020 election controversy reached its goal.

Scott, a Republican, will face Suzy Roberts for Adams Township clerk. Nichols, also a Republican, will face Randy Johnson for Adams Township supervisor in a special election next May.

The recall began with a petition by Gail McClanahan, an Adams Township resident upset with Scott’s refusal to comply with Democratic Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s order to hand over election equipment in October 2021.

Chief Deputy Clerk of Hillsdale County Abe Dane said both Roberts and Johnson will run in the Adams Township recall election on May 2 with no party affiliation, as election law prohibits challengers from running under the same party as officeholders.

Scott refused to give the township’s ballot tabulator to the secretary of state’s office in an effort to perform her duties as clerk, according to court documents. McClanahan said Scott was relieved of her duties in 2021 after refusing to comply with mandated Public Accuracy Testing and maintenance on voting equipment. In November 2021, Michigan State Police obtained a warrant and seized the tabulator from Adams Township Hall.

McClanahan said she gathered more than the required 264 signatures to file a recall petition.

“I think we got closer to 100 extra,” McClanahan said. “I don’t think there was a half a dozen that ever turned us down.”

McClanahan, who served on the Adams Township Board in years past, said Scott’s actions were costly to residents.

“Stephanie wouldn’t turn over the tabulator, so we had to turn around and buy a new tabulator which cost us $5,500. It was just so unnecessary,” McClanahan said. “Then Mark supported her. It was a 3 to 5 board vote, but he supported her in doing that.”

Hillsdale County Clerk

Marney Kast said the recall included Nichols for voting in agreement with Scott to not purchase a new tabulator in February.

Scott, represented by Detroit-based attorney Stephanie Lambert, filed a complaint against defendants Kast, Dane, Benson, and Michigan Director of the Bureau of Elections Jonathan Brater to the Michigan Court of Claims on Feb. 24, 2022.

The lawsuit alleges that defendants unconstitutionally usurped Scott’s powers and duties as township clerk because she refused to violate her oath of office. The complaint, filed in the Michigan Court of Claims, states Scott is obligated to uphold state and federal laws regarding preserving sensitive election data and equipment.

The lawsuit cites federal law Title 52, which states election officers must “retain and preserve” all records related to required actions for voting for 22 months after any federal elections.

Brater sent a letter to Scott on Sept. 8, 2021 about her refusal to comply with orders to allow a technician from Hart Intercivic, the company that manufactures the township’s voting equipment, to perform preventative maintenance.

The letter invokes a contract between the State of Michigan and Hart Intercivic, which requires this maintenance every two years. Brater said the maintenance neither destroys election data nor violates any federal law.

“While the bureau understands that individuals have circulated false claims asserting the actions listed above would somehow destroy data or violate federal record retention laws, these claims are not accurate,” Brater wrote.

In a July 11 affidavit, digital forensics expert Benjamin Cotton expressed concerns with the lack of cybersecurity protections on the tabulator.

“Given that the ballot images are stored on the tabulator, the QVF (Qualified Voter Files) is stored on the tabulator, the ballot images are stored on the tabulator and the tabulator has multiple modes of internet connectivity with few if any cybersecurity protections, a huge vulnerability exists,” Cotton said in the affidavit. “If an unauthorized person were to gain remote access to the tabulators, the vote as recorded on the tabulator could be modified.”

Cotton said he examined Adams Township’s Electronic Poll Book USB drive from the November 2020 election, which contains voter and election data. The time-stamped data is unique to both the machine and the election, making it evidence of the voting process. Cotton said there were discrepancies between the EPB and FOIA documents produced by the secretary of state’s office.

In February 2021, Dane sent an email, presented in the lawsuit, to township clerks including Scott, saying the clerks were free to change ballot storage containers.

“We received word from the state’s Bureau of Elections that the security of ballots and election equipment is released,” Dane said. “You are free to remove seals and store your ballots somewhere more convenient.”

Dane asked Scott to delete information from the drive in a March 2021 email.

“If you already have your EPB flash drive, please delete the Nov. 3, 2020, election folder within the drive,” Dane wrote.

The lawsuit claims Benson is aware of the alleged threat that the voting machine maintenance poses to election integrity, due to several other lawsuits she faces. Benson connected Brater with nonprofits to change voting rules in the 2020 election, according to The Federalist.

Scott said she has no intention of removing her name from the recall ballot.

“Not just Spangler’s, it's going to go everywhere in the state of Michigan. All those small mom and pop businesses can't afford this, especially after Covid.” Gutierrez said One Fair Wage has found that restaurant owners favor the new changes. “We have an association of 2,500 restaurant owners nationwide who are calling for policy to raise wages and end subminimum wages,” Gutierrez said. “They are calling for policy that will level the playing field and signal to millions of workers that wage increases will be permanent and it's worth coming back to work in restaurants.”

The state has taken the Court of Claims ruling raising the minimum wage to the Michigan Court of Appeals, which will hear the case on Dec. 13. The MRLA filed an amicus brief in the case, attempting to prevent the scheduled increase. McNamara said he thinks this isn’t the end of the legal battle.

“No matter what happens in the Court of Appeals,” McNamara said, “I think this eventually ends up being in the Michigan Supreme Court.”