Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge Carver County to boost election transparency and publish post-election corrections
Summary
Two public commenters asked the board to hold an elections workshop, increase public access to centralized processing (including a live stream if possible), expand public education around accuracy tests, and formalize public disclosure of post-election corrections under Minnesota statute MS 204C.38.
Two residents used public comment time to urge the Carver County Board to strengthen transparency around elections and post-election review processes.
Paul Hake of Chanhassen reviewed changes over the past 20 years in election administration and urged the board to hold an elections workshop. "I'm coming to give you a reminder that we have 0.05 anniversary this month... it is appropriate for this board as the holder of electoral powers... to, at minimum, have a workshop to go through how and why we're conducting elections," Hake said. He criticized federal executive orders as having altered election procedures and said citizens would benefit from an open, non-presumed-outcome discussion.
Monique LaCroix told the board Carver County has a "proud and verified history of election integrity" and urged three transparency measures: live-streamed observation of the county’s centralized processing center in Chaska (or time-stamped video archives if streaming is infeasible), turning public accuracy tests into major public-education events, and formalizing proactive audit disclosure so post-election corrections under "MS 204C.38" are published centrally. "Ensure the results of all post election reviews and obvious error corrections are published in a centralized, easy to access digital format for all residents," LaCroix said.
County staff and board members acknowledged the requests. Administrator Hintze confirmed an elections workshop was scheduled for the coming week and staff said materials are typically posted in advance. Board members expressed support for transparency while also noting statutory notice and operational constraints. No formal policy change was adopted at the meeting; the topic is slated for a work session and further board consideration.
