Elections commission PIG finds no credible evidence of 19,000‑ballot discrepancy; public pushes for audits and chain‑of‑custody records

The Hawaii Elections Commission on Oct. 20 heard a 99‑page permitted‑interaction‑group report concluding there was “no credible evidence to support the claim of a significant ballot discrepancy” in the 2024 general election on the Island of Hawaiʻi, but public commenters and some commissioners urged further investigation and better chain‑of‑custody reporting.

Commissioner Jeffrey Ostercamp, who read the PIG report for the panel, said the PIG compared certified state totals to county envelope tallies and to USPS business‑reply‑mail (BRM) receipts and found the BRM records incomplete and unsuitable for reconciling vote counts. “The Big Island’s envelope tally does, in fact, closely match its ballot count,” Ostercamp said, while noting that the state reported 76,595 mail‑in ballots and the county’s SVRS‑based envelope tally was 76,587 — a difference of eight ballots.

Why it matters: Several members of the public and commissioners argued the commission needs verifiable paper records and more transparent daily reporting to maintain public trust. Testifiers urged the commission to require counties to provide daily, independently verifiable counts of envelopes collected from drop boxes and the postal service and to preserve images or manifests that would support later audits.

What the PIG found: The report in part relied on interviews with county officials and a 2023 USPS inspector‑general audit of business‑reply‑mail systems. It concluded the USPS BRM system is not a reliable source for election reconciliation because BRM receipts were sometimes incomplete and were not designed to be an election accounting tool; the report said counties and the state rely on the statewide voter registration system (SVRS) and the official ballot‑counting process to reconcile envelopes and ballots.

Public response: Dozens of public testifiers criticized the report and the commission for not pursuing records they sought, including copies of BRM receipts, drop‑box collection logs and daily SVRS extracts. Judith Mills Wong of the League of Women Voters said the PIG report was “very thorough” and that the county’s reconciliation with SVRS is appropriate, while many other speakers called for independent audits or a return to precinct/day voting. Austin Martin, chair of the Libertarian Party of Hawaii, said withholding records fosters suspicion: “It’s not like there’s a ton of people involved in this conspiracy,” he said, arguing the commission should make data accessible for independent review.

Commission action and votes: The commission debated several motions during the meeting. A motion to request daily, hand‑count‑based reports from county clerks (including counts of envelopes collected) was discussed and amended but failed to pass in final vote. A separate motion to send a letter to the USPS inspector general asking how many ballots were delivered to Hawaiʻi County failed on roll call. The commission did, however, vote to: 1) ask the attorney general for a written opinion about a pending federal HAVA complaint and whether the commission must act on it (motion passed); and 2) refer a formal complaint filed by an individual (Doug Pasnick) to the attorney general for investigation (motion passed). The commission also voted to agendize formation of a PIG to meet with county clerks about chain‑of‑custody and reporting at the next meeting.

What the PIG did not do: The group said it did not compile every available USPS BRM receipt and that counties have not historically relied on BRM receipts for reconciliation. The PIG emphasized that the counties and the state rely on SVRS counts and the voting system’s tabulation as the official reconciliation method; the report warned against treating incomplete BRM totals as a reliable proxy for ballots received.

Next steps: Commissioners agreed to place a proposal to form a PIG to meet with county clerks on the next public agenda so that members of the public can testify about the PIG’s scope. Commissioners also asked the attorney general for a written opinion about a HAVA complaint the commission received.

Ending note: The meeting underscored a basic divide: the PIG and some commissioners rely on established SVRS‑based reconciliation and the state’s tabulation procedures, while a vocal segment of the public and other commissioners seek daily, publicly posted envelope accounting and independent audits. The commission left the record with unresolved requests for additional documentation and legal guidance.