In a contentious government meeting, members of the commission expressed frustration over procedural issues and the handling of critical questions regarding election integrity. The meeting, which was called to address a complaint from the Office of Information Practices (OIP), saw heated exchanges about the adherence to the six-day notice rule required for meetings.

Commissioner Cushke moved to vote on whether the notice rule had been followed, but the motion failed due to a lack of sufficient votes. The commission's structure requires a majority of the entire body—five votes—to pass a motion, leading to confusion among members about the voting process.

The discussion shifted to the need for transparency and compliance with the Sunshine Law, which prohibits discussions among three or more commissioners outside of formal meetings. Chair Curtis proposed creating an online meeting packet to ensure all communications are accessible to both commissioners and the public, aiming to enhance transparency.

However, tensions escalated as members accused the chair of withholding information and failing to address urgent questions regarding election procedures, including the use of ballot images and chain of custody documentation. Concerns were raised about the potential manipulation of ballot images and the lack of oversight in signature verification processes.

As the meeting concluded, calls for an additional meeting before the upcoming general election were made, emphasizing the urgency of addressing these unresolved issues. Despite the chair's attempt to adjourn the meeting, procedural questions lingered, highlighting ongoing frustrations within the commission regarding election oversight and communication.