Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Public commenters debate calls for Commissioner Sakovich's resignation

Utah County Commission · March 20, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

During public comment, Kristen Chevrier of Highland defended Commissioner Sakovich against calls to resign, citing illness and attendance record; another commenter, Kenneth Patchork, urged resignation and alleged election fraud, church influence and other conspiracies. The commission did not take formal action.

At the March 20, 2024 Utah County Commission meeting, two public commenters addressed ongoing calls for Commissioner Sakovich to resign.

Kristen Chevrier of Highland spoke in defense of the commissioner, saying the resignation call was inappropriate because Sakovich had been battling an illness for roughly three months and was only now returning to full duties. She said his average attendance, including while ill, "is better than any other commissioner," that other commissioners have used Zoom as well, and warned that replacing a sitting commissioner ahead of the April 20 county convention could interfere with election processes. "I think that the call is inappropriate for 3 reasons," she said, listing illness, attendance and election timing.

Later in the public comment period, Kenneth Patchork described a broad series of allegations. Patchork said he fled persecution and identified himself as a whistleblower; he asserted a conspiracy he compared to "Mormon gate or Watergate 2," alleged election‑related irregularities in 2020 (including a claim that a clerk was charged for discarding ballots), and accused religious and political actors of market manipulation, improper property practices and contributing to long housing wait lists. The commission limited his remaining time to 60 seconds; no commission action or investigation was announced during the meeting.

Neither the commission nor staff provided investigative findings in response to the allegations during the public comment segment. A deputy was offered to take materials from the commenter to deliver to the commission.

The commission proceeded to closed session after public comment and later returned to regular session before adjourning.