Mayor Dave Bronson has questions about how the most recent municipal election was handled — questions that were raised by election observers and citizens, questions that were never adequately answered. The mayor has sent a letter to Municipal Clerk Barbara Jones to ask for a forensic audit of the election technology and processes used during the April ballot counting.
Bronson asked that the Clerk’s Office retain all documents, emails, and other materials that are related to his request for information. Some of his concerns were brought up by volunteer observers during the April 5 election. The Assembly was made aware of the concerns by the observers prior to them certifying the election.
Specifically, the mayor is asking the Clerk’s Office to address:
Why an apparently unscheduled, unannounced visit of a Dominion Voting Systems technician, or third-party contractor for Dominion, was on site at the election center on April 19. A man named Whu Leung signed into the election center at about 9 am, and appeared to open, connect cables to, insert USB sticks in, and/or edit or update the software on the Dominion Voting Systems machine, according to election observers. This occurred prior to the certification of the election, and before all ballots had arrived for counting.
Who did Leung work for? What was Mr. Leung doing at the election center on April 19? What duties did he perform? Were those duties requested by an election official and if so, who and why was the request made? Which contract was Leung operating under? These are some of the questions the volunteer observers had that were not answered satisfactorily two weeks ago.
According to the Mayor’s Office, Leung inserted USB flash sticks inside the Dominion Voting Systems tabulation machine. What was on these USB flash sticks? Why was a flash stick required to perform the technical work Leung was onsite for? Did the Municipal Clerk’s Office conduct a background check or similar search of Leung before he was authorized to modify, edit, and possibly tamper with critical voting infrastructure?
The Mayor’s Office also wants to know why many voters didn’t get their ballots delivered at their homes and whether the Clerk’s Office kept a log of all voters who called to report they didn’t receive their ballots. What did the Clerk’s Office do to remedy the situation?
“In a particular observer complaint, filed April 3, 2022, Deputy Clerk of Elections Jamie Heinz stated that election officials may have identified an isolated issue where ballot styles 1941 and 1944 arrived late or did not arrive at all. The observer complaint also acknowledges that additional ballots of styles 1941 and 1944 were sent to the Loussac Library to account for this potential issue,” the Mayor’s Office wrote.
The mail-only ballots were supposed to be mailed to voters 21 days before the election. The Mayor’s Office wants to know if that occurred, because it appears many ballots did not arrival timely. When exactly were the ballots mailed?
There is also the issue of felt-tipped pens being used in the voting area of the Loussac Library on April 5, the final day of the election. The ballot tells voters to use black or blue ink, but dry-erase pens were made available at the voting station, where people could mark their ballots and drop them in a box. Those markers had a tendency to smear.
Observers also told the Office of the Mayor that there were a higher number of “undeliverable” ballots in the 2022 Regular Municipal Election compared to the 2021 Regular Municipal Election, despite fewer ballots having been mailed out. The Mayor’s Office wants to know exactly how many ballots were mailed and came back undelivered in 2021 and also in 2022, and what the rationale is for the difference in the two numbers.
The letter sent to the Clerk is an extensive public records request that has in bold letters at the bottom of each page a disclaimer saying the Mayor’s Office does not allege that the election results are inaccurate. The request is detailed and could take Clerk Jones several days or weeks to fill. It is likely Jones, who has a somewhat hostile approach toward the mayor’s team, will charge the Mayor’s Office a significant fee for the fulfillment of the public records request. Her office is under the direction of the Anchorage Assembly, not the executive branch.
