Dunedin District Court Judge Stephen Coyle yesterday granted Ms Butler's application for a recount, but he refused her request for an assurance there would be no costs above a $750 deposit she had made.
He said Ms Butler should be under no illusion there was the potential for costs, and gave her until next Tuesday to "reflect as to whether she wishes to proceed with the recount".
Ms Butler's approach to Mr Cull followed the release of the judge's decision at 5.40pm.
Ms Butler applied on Tuesday for a full recount of the election results, claiming the close vote, and similarity of names on the poll, as reasons to check almost 34,000 voting papers.
On Wednesday, it became clear the cost of the recount would be up to $70,000.
Yesterday, Judge Coyle said in his ruling the Local Electoral Act 2001 required him to be satisfied Ms Butler, not he, had reasonable grounds to believe the electoral result was incorrect.
He had evidence from electoral officer Pam Jordan and electionz.com chief returning officer Warwick Lamp about the mechanisms of the vote-counting process, but "the Act does not require me to assess that evidence; only the reasonableness of Ms Butler's subjective view".
It was "important to keep in mind that all I have found is that there are reasonable grounds for Ms Butler believing that the declaration is incorrect," he said.
"I want to be clear. I have not found the results of the election are flawed and therefore are incorrect."
There would be court costs outside the cost of the recount, and case law indicated the requesting candidate should expect to contribute something towards the cost.
"Ms Butler, in choosing to go ahead with the recount, should therefore be under no illusions that she faces the potential of a costs award against her, and that such an award could potentially be significant, if the recount is unsuccessful."
Asked to respond last night, Ms Butler said by email the judge had decided she had made a legitimate case for a recount.
"I thank him for according me this democratic right.
"Unfortunately, the decision as to costs still leaves me in an awkward position financially.
"No candidate should have to bear the threat of this cost, especially when the judge has ruled there are reasonable grounds for a recount," Ms Butler said.
"I now appeal to our new mayor, Dave Cull, to give me reassurance that the council will not seek any costs against me, so that my democratic right can be fulfilled.
"A democratic right for a recount should be available to all, regardless of wealth."
But Mr Cull refused the request, saying he could not give that assurance.
He was in a difficult position as the ratepayers may have to pay for a "futile request" for a recount.
"The judge didn't say he thought she had a case. He said she thought subjectively she did."
Mr Cull said the matter was not something for the mayor or council, but for the judge to decide.
In response, Ms Butler said Mr Cull did not know if the recount would be "futile".
"A recount is to establish if errors have been made.
"The real Dave Cull has emerged after the election," she said.
"People can now judge his promise and performance, barely two weeks into his mayoralty.
"The mayor and council can decide if the desire for fairness is there."
Correction
Our report yesterday about the likely cost of an election recount in Dunedin stated that, despite the cost, Bev Butler said she still planned to go ahead with the recount.
This is incorrect.
When asked if she was still going to go ahead with a recount, given that the preliminary quote for the work was between $60,000 and $70,000, and, if so, if she wanted to explain her reasons, Ms Butler replied: "My reasons are fully explained in my affidavit.
"There is nothing further to add.
"The decision by the judge is due out tomorrow at 5pm."
