Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenters at Klamath County meeting urge action on elections and recount local housing harms
Summary
At the Sept. 9 meeting Michael Stettler alleged large-scale errors in 2024 voter records and asked the board to adopt a resolution; another resident criticized purging rolls as a diversion and recounted a neighbor’s eviction and rent-to-own scam as a housing-justice example.
During the public-comment period at the Klamath County commissioners’ meeting on Sept. 9, two speakers pressed the board on separate civic concerns: one raised detailed allegations about voter-roll integrity, and another recounted a local housing injustice.
Michael Stettler, identified as a volunteer with United for Freedom, told the board his organization’s data team had found what he described as “104,720 material errors and omissions in the voter registration database,” and other numerical discrepancies he said affected the 2024 general election. He listed figures including "155,163 votes who probably have been counted from these ineligible voters" and "4,174 excess votes counted beyond the number of voters who participated," and urged the board to adopt a resolution and take action to address the alleged problems.
The board offered a question-and-answer opportunity and invited follow-up; no verification documents were entered on the record during the meeting.
An unidentified resident who said they had run for election this year criticized the idea of purging voter rolls, calling such measures “absurd” and arguing that gerrymandering and poor representation in Salem were the underlying problems. That speaker then described a neighbor’s long rent-to-own arrangement, an injury, missed payments and subsequent eviction, using the account to illustrate housing and labor vulnerabilities in the community.
Neither public commenter’s claims were verified in the meeting record; the board did not take immediate formal action on either speaker’s requests during the session.
What’s next: the claims made during public comment remain allegations in the meeting transcript. Staff or the board could request supporting documentation or place any proposed resolutions on a future agenda for formal consideration.
