Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Election Integrity topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Moffat County resident urges end to electronic voting machines during public comment
Summary
A longtime Moffat County resident urged the commissioners to remove all electronic voting equipment, citing security concerns, logic and accuracy tests, and chain‑of‑custody issues during a public comment period Sept. 23.
John Williams, who identified himself as a Moffat County resident of about 50 years, used the public comment period at the Sept. 23 meeting to urge commissioners to eliminate electronic voting machines. Williams said his group helped address misprinted ballots in the previous election, but that those ballots ultimately were fed into machines containing proprietary software and foreign components that, he argued, present a security risk.
Williams said, "We all have to understand these machines are in every sense of the word, a computer," and argued that proprietary systems prevent public inspection of software and auditability. He raised concerns about logic and accuracy tests (LAT) and risk‑limiting audits (RLA), saying they are performed with parameters provided to election staff and asserted those processes can be controlled and are therefore insufficient checks.
What was said - Williams referenced comments attributed to Elon Musk, writing that "we should eliminate electronic voting machines," and called for hand‑counted paper ballots or alternatives that provide visible chain of custody. He said mail ballots and automatic registration create large pools of registered voters that could be exploited, and said he had "100% confidence in the local people we have" while expressing distrust of the voting equipment.
What the board did The comments were part of the public comment period; no board action or motion about voting equipment was taken during the meeting. Commissioners acknowledged the comment but moved on to the published agenda.
Context and limitations The commenter expressed opinions and concerns about election security and auditing processes. The county did not present staff or technical testimony in response during the meeting, and the transcript does not document any follow‑up motions or staff directives tied to the remarks.
