Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Registrar Removals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State board orders petitions to court in Franklin, Waynesboro and Norfolk after compliance hearings; dismisses Radford case
Summary
After extended testimony from local election officials, registrars and residents, the Virginia State Board of Elections directed legal staff to petition circuit courts seeking removal in Franklin, Waynesboro and Norfolk for alleged failures to discharge duties; it dismissed the Radford matter for insufficient basis. The Norfolk motion passed 4–1.
The Virginia State Board of Elections voted to direct its legal representatives to prepare petitions to circuit courts in three localities after hearing testimony about allegations of improper conduct and failures to carry out election duties.
Pursuant to cited code sections, the board voted to ask legal counsel to file a petition to the Franklin Circuit Court seeking removal of Franklin general registrar Jennifer Maynard for failure to discharge official duties; the motion was moved and the roll call recorded unanimous Aye votes.
After hearing testimony from Radford electoral board members who acknowledged a procedural mistake in their handling of provisional ballots and committed to follow rules going forward, the board voted to dismiss consideration of removal in Radford for insufficient basis.
The board also directed legal counsel to prepare a petition to the Waynesboro Circuit Court regarding electoral board member Curtis Lilly for alleged failures in duties; that motion carried on roll call with Aye votes recorded.
On the Norfolk matter — which drew lengthy in‑person and remote testimony from Mary Anne McKay (electoral board member), Norfolk director Stephanie Isles, and multiple election officials and residents — the board voted to direct a petition to the Norfolk Circuit Court to seek removal of Mary Anne McKay from the Norfolk electoral board for failure to discharge official duties. The roll call on the Norfolk motion recorded four Aye votes and one No (Delegate Marix), and the chair announced the motion passed by majority.
What was presented: testimony included complaints that provisional‑ballot processing at a Chesterfield precinct was chaotic, that envelopes were not sealed as required at times, and that some electoral‑board members interfered with precinct operations. Supporters of the registrar described heavy turnout at campuses and a high volume of same‑day registrations and provisional ballots, and they urged the board to consider staffing and training constraints. Several speakers described strained local board dynamics and alleged disrespect or racially charged comments by a board member; the registrar of Norfolk described the work environment as "toxic" and said staff had been harassed.
How the board decided: members moved into closed session to discuss the complaints, reconvened and certified compliance with open‑meeting law, then voted on motions recorded on the public record. The motions cite code sections under which the state board may petition a circuit court to seek removal of a general registrar or electoral board member.
Immediate outcome and next steps: the board directed its legal representation to prepare petitions in Franklin, Waynesboro and Norfolk; the Radford removal request was dismissed. The Norfolk petition motion passed by majority (4–1). The board did not remove any official at the meeting; the directed petitions begin a court process.
