Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Election Canvass topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Emigration Canyon council approves canvass of 2025 election results; county discrepancy to be clarified
Summary
The council approved a resolution certifying the 2025 canvass for Emigration Canyon, endorsing results that show David Grama for mayor and Robert Pinon as council at-large; staff will ask the county clerk to explain a small discrepancy between ballots cast and total votes reported.
Emigration Canyon — The Emigration Canyon City Council voted to approve the canvass of the 2025 election results after staff presented the county's "final unofficial" report and answered questions about ballot counts.
Diana, who presented the election packet, told the council the jurisdiction had a 46% voter turnout and 527 total ballots. She reported 519 mail-in ballots, four in-person ballots and three returned electronically; five ballots were listed as curable (four were not cured), three envelopes had signatures that did not match, and one ballot was challenged for another reason. "You guys had a total voter turnout of 46, which is pretty good," Diana said.
The results posted in the packet listed David Grama as mayor and Robert Pinon as council member at-large; Diana said the more detailed report in the packet showed 324 votes for Robert and 201 votes for Jacob (last name not specified in the transcript).
Why it matters: The council's formal approval clears the way to publish the canvass resolution and the related documentation. It also triggers a follow-up with the county election office to resolve a small arithmetic discrepancy in the county's unofficial file.
Questions and follow-up: A council member noted the county report shows 527 ballots cast but only 525 total votes recorded and asked whether blank or invalid ballots explained the difference. Diana said the county report was the "final unofficial results" received that afternoon and that she would email Thomas in the elections office to ask why the two numbers differ and share his response with the council. "I'll send him an email, and I'll get an explanation for you, and I'll send that out to you guys," she said.
Legal citation: A council member also flagged a code citation in the resolution template; Speaker 3 said the correct reference should read "2484-304" instead of the number listed in the template. Diana confirmed she would update the citation and include the correction in the packet.
Vote and next steps: After discussion, a council member moved to approve the resolution and it was seconded. The clerk completed a roll-call confirmation: David Grama — aye; Joe Smoka — aye; Catherine — aye; Robert — aye; Jennifer — absent. Diana said she would correct the document, send the packet for signatures via DocuSign and post the signed documents publicly once returned.
The council then moved to adjourn and took an "aye" vote to end the meeting. Diana noted she received the county's reports late in the afternoon (around 2:30 p.m.), which contributed to the brief delay in delivering the packet to the council.
What remains open: The council's approval was procedural certification of the canvass; the only outstanding item recorded in the meeting was staff's follow-up with the county elections office to explain the 527 vs. 525 discrepancy. The council did not rescind or alter any results at the meeting.
