A new legislative audit released Tuesday found that while the office of Utah’s chief election official has been “diligent in improving” the state’s election system, some county clerks, including those in Utah, Wasatch, and San Juan counties, “did not fully implement all changes” to election requirements.
Auditors conducted an in-depth review of these three counties, noting that the clerks overseeing their elections “can improve their efforts to follow and implement changes to election requirements.” The report expressed concern that in some instances, county clerks repeated compliance errors identified in previous audits, suggesting a misunderstanding of corrective actions or a failure to fully address them.
Crucially, auditors reiterated that, consistent with past audits, they found no “significant fraud” in Utah’s elections. However, they concluded that the “repeated deficiencies” underscore a need for greater oversight of election compliance. While the Lieutenant Governor’s office has statutory authority to enforce compliance, auditors noted that Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson’s office has prioritized assisting and supporting clerks, rather than immediately enforcing compliance.
This “limited approach to oversight,” which sometimes defers to county elected officials’ implementation decisions instead of actively monitoring and correcting noncompliance, may have contributed to the recurring errors, according to the auditors. Despite this, Henderson’s office was credited with following recommendations from 2022 and 2024 reports to improve the state’s election system. Still, auditors observed clerks repeating errors from prior audits and struggling with new election requirements.
In Utah County, the state’s second-most populous county, the audit noted that the office, most recently headed by Clerk Aaron Davidson, “generally conducts its elections well.” However, specific instances of non-compliance were identified. These included not fully adhering to requirements for reviewing candidate nomination signature packets, some volunteers failing to complete state-required training before conducting post-election audits, and poll workers inconsistently accepting or rejecting different types of documents for proof of residency, which may have impacted some provisional voters’ ability to register and cast a ballot. The county also did not reconcile or document reconciliation discrepancies within the legally mandated timeframe.
Auditors also reported that some candidate signature packets submitted to Utah County lacked required information, such as contact details for signature gatherers. Instead of rejecting these packets, the Utah County clerk’s office sometimes gathered “missing information from indirect sources instead of from the candidates,” and still accepted them. Furthermore, Clerk Davidson and his elections director did not create policies or procedures to avoid a conflict of interest when processing candidate nomination petitions, despite Davidson being on the ballot for the 2026 primary election. Administrative rules require county clerks to develop a written audit policy and, in a race with a potential conflict of interest, to designate another elected official to conduct audits for that specific race. Auditors noted that while Davidson did not involve himself in the candidate nomination petition signature audit, the elections director and an elections administrator performed it, rather than a separate elected official. Davidson’s office reportedly indicated it was unaware of these specific requirements. Davidson later lost to his GOP challenger, Corey Astill.
In his written response, Utah County Clerk Aaron Davidson disagreed with the audit’s findings, characterizing them as “nitpicking.” Davidson stated that the audit “went way beyond its intended purpose by identifying minor mistakes and creating an environment of contention,” and warned that such scrutiny could deter qualified election workers. He argued that performance audits should focus on meaningful system improvements rather than “threatening enforcement actions for minor errors made by humans operating within a complex, ever-changing system.”
Auditors acknowledged that “human error is a factor in all systems,” but countered that the mistakes found were “repeat errors that appeared in prior audits and that have been made by multiple clerks.” They deemed this pattern “concerning” and stated they expect improvement from the subsequent clerk, even though Davidson will not be in office for the follow-up audit.
Wasatch County, led by Clerk-Auditor Joey Granger, also presented “several relatively minor shortcomings in processes,” including issues with ballot chain of custody, reconciliation, and election audits. The report indicated the office had “failed to implement some recent chan.” San Juan County was also noted as having clerks who “did not fully implement all changes” to election requirements.
Lieutenant Governor Henderson, in her response, acknowledged the tension between state oversight and the actions of independently elected county officials. She detailed her office’s efforts, including visiting each of the three counties, providing training, and offering resources to correct mistakes. Henderson also cited “numerous legislative changes” to the state’s election system each year as a challenge, noting that a major election law from last year, HB300, was passed without funding for a full-time employee to help implement its changes. She expressed a desire for time to fully implement new laws and assess their effectiveness before substantial new changes are made, believing this would reduce voter confusion, human error, and save taxpayer dollars. The audit released Tuesday was a follow-up to how Henderson’s office and county clerks have implemented recommendations from a 2024 audit, emphasizing the ongoing need for election integrity.
