Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Election Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Observers press Washoe County on ballot‑processing visibility and security during public comment
Summary
Multiple public commenters raised concerns about ballot-room observation, use of devices and missing livestream monitors; speakers urged county officials to restore meaningful live observation and answer observer questions in real time.
Several members of the public used the board’s public‑comment period to press election officials and the Board of County Commissioners for greater transparency in ballot processing.
An observer described practices in the registrar's ballot-processing and tabulation rooms that they said weaken cybersecurity and chain of custody, including reuse of thumb drives in the EMS/tabulation room, lack of seals on trays of scanned ballots and limited livestream visibility. “The thumb drive isn't secured between uses and leaves the EMS Tabulation Room in... staff's pocket and at risk,” the speaker said. The commenter also asserted that a Department of Defense expert had described the department’s procedures as a “complete and total cybersecurity failure.”
Robbie Williams, a frequent observer, told the board lobby monitors that once displayed live tabulation were removed in 2026 and said the change limits meaningful bipartisan observation. “Transparency, true bipartisan observation is essential,” Williams said, and he asked why the county removed a 2024 lobby monitor that previously allowed the public to watch tabulation in real time.
Another commenter, Oscar Williams, said he filed a civil and voting‑rights complaint about the accuracy and distribution of mailed sample ballots and urged the county to consider a citizens advisory board for elections. Brianna Forzowski urged stable livestream camera views and asked the county to keep processing‑room lights on so remote observers can view operations.
Commissioner Clark and other board members acknowledged the concerns and asked staff to look into ways to answer observer questions more promptly. The board did not take formal action but several commissioners requested follow‑up meetings with county staff to discuss observer access and real‑time information sharing.
Note: speakers raised serious procedural and security concerns as public comment; these are allegations and questions recorded in public comment. The meeting record shows the commissioners asking staff to investigate and report back rather than adjudicating the specific claims during the session.
