Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Oversight Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State Election Board presses for access to election‑night reporting and raises concerns about case backlog
Summary
Board members urged guaranteed, bipartisan access to the Secretary of State's election‑night reporting location and voted to ask the attorney general for assistance if the Secretary of State's office does not provide timely access; members also criticized delays and formatting problems in cases submitted for the board's June docket.
Board members at the May 1 meeting pressed for a clearer, consistent process to allow State Election Board members to observe statewide election‑night reporting at the Secretary of State's office and expressed frustration at delays in case materials from the Secretary of State's investigators.
Doctor Johnson and Member Grubbs argued the board should have at least two members (one from each party) present at election‑night reporting and should be able to observe aggregation of county tabulations. "I think there should be required 2 members of the state election board in that room," Doctor Johnson said, adding that bipartisan representation and party representatives can build public confidence in the process.
Members also recounted persistent problems getting case materials in the standard ROI/SOI formats from the Secretary of State's office and questioned whether the office's process made the board heavily reliant on the secretary's staff to prioritize which cases are presented. The chair said he will meet with the Secretary of State to attempt to restore the prior pre‑meeting process and to obtain cases for the June meeting.
When the Secretary of State's office did not provide an immediate assurance of access, the board voted (amended motion) to reach out to the attorney general's office for assistance in securing member observation of the state's reporting location if necessary; the transcript records the motion as carrying 3–1.
Why it matters: Election‑night reporting aggregates county results for the state, and board members said direct observation and transparent procedures matter to public confidence, particularly when the Secretary of State — who oversees tabulation — may be a candidate on the ballot.
Next steps: Chairman Praveer said he will contact the Secretary of State the week of May 4 to raise members' concerns and to seek clarification of credentials and observation procedures; the board directed staff to pursue attorney‑general assistance if the Secretary of State’s office does not provide adequate access.
