Why file a civil case?
When the Attorney General fought the sheriff's investigation into these election inconsistencies, we knew if was time for the people to stand up and do something.
Â
The Election Accountability Project asked the Riverside County Superior Court to stop the destruction of election records while a legal question about ballot reconciliation is decided. And account for the discrepancies found in the citizen audits.Â
​
We are not contesting an election.
We are asking that the evidence still exist when the question is answered.
​
Case: Election Accountability Project, Inc. v. Art Tinoco, in his official capacity as Riverside County Registrar of Voters;
Â
County of Riverside Filed: August 24, 2026, Riverside County Superior Court
Â
Counsel: Alexander H. Haberbush, Constitutional Counsel Group
Ultimately, answer the Question:
-
Direct the Registrar to perform, complete, or demonstrate the reconciliation required by Elections Code section 15302, sufficient to account for and explain the identified variances
-
Declare that a reconciliation confined to internally consistent electronic records, without accounting for the conflicting physical ballot records, does not satisfy the statute
-
If that reconciliation identifies a recurring deficiency, require the County to correct it before administering future elections under the same procedures
What we did not ask for:
-
No change to any certified election result
-
No recount, decertification, or reopening of any election
-
No custody, inspection, or opening of any ballot by EAP
-
No claim that fraud occurred, that unlawful ballots were counted, or that any result was wrong
What we asked the court to do:Â
Â
Immediately Preserve the Evidence
-
Prohibit the destruction, deletion, alteration, or overwriting of records needed to reconcile ballot receipt, processing, accounting, and counting in the November 2024 General Election and the November 2025 Special Election
-
Require any sealed ballot packages to remain in the exclusive custody of election officials, unopened and unaltered
-
Require the County to provide a verified inventory, within 10 days, of what records exist, where they are kept, their scheduled destruction dates, and whether any have already been destroyed
Riverside County Election Investigation Civil PetitionÂ
Case Info
Case: Election Accountability Project, Inc. v. Art Tinoco, in his official capacity as Riverside County Registrar of Voters; County of Riverside
Â
Case No.: CVRI2605236 Court: Riverside County Superior Court, Department 4 — Hon. Daniel Ottolia Filed: August 24, 2026
Â
Counsel: Alexander H. Haberbush, Constitutional Counsel Group
Purpose
California law requires county election officials to reconcile their ballot records as part of every official canvass. Public records from two Riverside County elections show large differences between ballots counted and ballots reflected as received — differences that have not been explained.
​
The Election Accountability Project asked the Riverside County Superior Court to require that reconciliation, and to preserve the records needed to perform it before they are destroyed.
​
On August 25, 2026, the court granted a temporary restraining order preserving the records and issued an order to show cause regarding a preliminary injunction.
What the citizen audits found:
Volunteers in Riverside County developed a strict audit process and compared the County's published certified totals against the County's own ballot intake records — vote center ballot statements, vote-by-mail collection forms, and daily mail intake sheets — and subtracted the ballots the County reported as received but not counted.
​
A variance in one election might come from an isolated clerical error or a particular reporting convention. A materially similar variance in a second election run by the same office under the same procedures raises a different question: whether something in the process itself is producing it.
​
The full audit reports are linked HERE:
​
Where the case stands today:
On August 25, 2026, the court granted EAP's application for a temporary restraining order and an order to show cause regarding a preliminary injunction. The ex parte hearing scheduled for the following morning was vacated as no longer necessary.
​
Riverside County has since applied to vacate the temporary restraining order. A hearing on the County's application is set for September 10, 2026.
​
A hearing on the amount of the undertaking and on the briefing schedule for the order to show cause is set for September 28, 2026. A status hearing on the writ petition is set for November 2, 2026.
​
The temporary restraining order preserves records. It does not change any election result, and it does not give EAP access to any ballot.
​
Last updated: September 8, 2026
California requires county election officials to conduct an official canvass after every election, and Elections Code section 15302 says that canvass "shall include, but not be limited to" a series of specified tasks.
Â
Three of them are reconciliations:
-
Subdivision (b): the number of signatures on the roster, reconciled with the number of ballots recorded on the ballot statement
-
Subdivision (c): if that comparison shows a discrepancy, ballots received from each polling place, reconciled with ballots cast as indicated on the ballot statement
-
Subdivision (d): ballots counted, spoiled, canceled, or invalidated, reconciled with the votes recorded by the vote-counting system, including vote-by-mail and provisional ballots
Â
Notice the structure. Every one of these compares records of different kinds. Paper against machine. Signatures against statements. Ballots received against ballots counted.
​
That is the point. The paper records created as ballots arrive and are processed — rosters, ballot statements, collection forms, mail intake sheets — exist as an independent check on the totals the electronic system produces. A comparison confined to records the counting system generated about itself would be internally consistent and would verify nothing.
​
The California Legislature has described the duties associated with completing and certifying election results as "ministerial and nondiscretionary." They are not optional.