Observations From An Alternate Oklahoma County Election Board Member Regarding Oklahoma County Election Procedure

Jenni White

May 2023, the Chairman of Oklahoma County Republican Party (Ken Warner) had the opportunity to appoint a Republican member (Cheryl Williams) and alternate member (me) to the Oklahoma County Election Board.  Since that time, both Cheryl and I have relayed questions to both Warner and Election Board officials regarding OK CO Election Board procedure.

Since September 6th, when Cheryl and I attended a mandatory Election Board meeting, I’ve had various questions that – both Cheryl and I – have asked election officials and legislators without getting answers to solve the issues as I’d hoped. 

December 11th, 2023, Governor Stitt signed an Executive Order (2023-29) creating the Task Force on Campaign Finance and Election Threats which is authorized until March 31st, 2024. While I am grateful and hopeful for government oversight into these matters, I also believe that the public should be aware of my observations (and suggestions) for the Oklahoma County Election Board as well as those I’ve previously published regarding Dark Money (campaign finance). What follows is a description of several issues I’ve witnessed over the course of my time participating as an Oklahoma County Election Board alternate.

Friday, December 15^th, 2023, Cheryl Williams (Vice-Chairman) of the 3-person Oklahoma County Election Board (comprised of a Republican, a Democrat – Chairman, David Glover – and the Secretary of the Oklahoma County Election Board, Doug Sanderson) voted against certification of the December 12^th election which would choose a general election candidate to replace Ryan Martinez, the House Representative for district 39, and a sales tax to build a sports arena in downtown Oklahoma City.

At issue is the prescription of Oklahoma Administrative Code (OAC) and Oklahoma law, versus OK CO Election Board procedure as outlined in these observations.

According to State Law (26-14-125) absentee ballots must be counted on the day of election (OAC 230:30-19-3).

26-14-125 C. 1. Says that, “Upon written approval by the Secretary of the State Election Board, the county election board may begin the process of counting absentee ballots as described in this section on a date earlier than the day of the election.”

Absentee ballot counting began Monday, December 11^th. Neither Glover nor Williams were presented with evidence of authorization for early counting at that time.  After Williams directed an email to OK State Election Board Secretary Paul Ziriax after the meeting questioning this issue, a letter from Ziriax to OK CO Election Board Secretary, Doug Sanderson, dated December 12^th, was provided to Williams and Glover Friday, December 15^th.

This letter indicated that Ziriax had received a letter dated 10-25-23 from Sanderson requesting an earlier counting date for the December 12^th election, but that letter had contained a typographical error resulting in lack of approval for absentee ballot counting on the 11^th. 

Ziriax’ letter to Sanderson contained an amended authorization for the 11^th, as “the best resolution for ensuring a proper count of absentee ballots received in Oklahoma County and so that the transfer cases containing those ballots are not disturbed.”

According to OAC 230:30-19-4, Procedure for counting absentee ballots on election day, 230:30-19-4 (5), “The Secretary shall assign an employee of the County Election Board to each voting device or high-speed scanner to be used to count the absentee ballots.  The County Election Board Chairman and Vice Chairman shall be present and shall observe the counting process.”

Neither Glover nor Cheryl were able to observe any of the counting process in person.  Both members were confined to a public room the entire time absentee ballots were being handled and counted and were required to watch the entire procedure on a closed-circuit television also made available for any members of the public attending the meeting.

The only member of the 3-person OK CO Election Board present in the room to observe all absentee ballot processing and counting procedure was Secretary Sanderson.  Unfortunately, many times Sanderson was out of range of the CCTV handling absentee ballots, making direct observation by Glover, Williams and the public impossible. In fact, neither Williams or Glover were able to see the absentee ballot ‘box’ (a large rollaway garbage can with 3 locks on it – 1 kept by Glover, 1 kept by Cheryl and 1 kept by Sanderson) being opened, nor the ballots being counted.

Glover and Williams were allowed to examine absentee affidavit ballot envelopes (12.11.23).  These were brought into them by OK CO Election Board staff and split between Glover and Williams. Both checked the affidavits for the ballots in each of their piles, but there was no cross-check performed.

OAC 230:30-11-3 says, “If the County Election Board meets prior to election day to open outer envelopes as outlined in 230:30-11-2 [revoked](?), it is permissible for the Board members also to open and remove affidavit envelopes that are determined to be executed properly.  Upon removing the affidavits, the Board members shall place the ballot envelopes in a ballot box of the type described in 230:30-7-8(b) and shall lock the box…. Additionally, the Board members shall affix a long, white State Election Board seal across the opening on the top of the box so that the opening is entirely obstructed.  The County Election Board members each shall sign and date the seal.  Each member of the County Election Board shall retain the key to only one of the locks on the ballot box.  The Secretary shall store the ballot box in a secure place until it is time to count absentee ballots on election day.”

According to OAC 230:-19-4 (10), the employee operating the voting (counting) device is to put the [absentee] ballots in a transfer case and that case is to be sealed with a State Election Board seal [tape] to be signed by the person who operated the voting device and all County Election Board members. 

These seals [tapes] were brought into the room with Glover and Williams for their signature, however, neither member saw either the box, or the contents of the box – just the seal [tape].  

Election Monday (12.11.23), I emailed a formal complaint to the State Election Board, explaining the procedure I had witnessed that Monday and what I had observed during the Jones school bond election held the previous November 14^th.  I also asked Secretary Ziriax to direct a member of the Oklahoma State Election Board to observe the next two meetings of the OK CO Election Board due to the concerns detailed in my complaint.  Unfortunately, no State Board Member was present for either the 12.12 or 12.15 OK CO Election Board meetings as requested.

According to OAC 230:35-3-84, “The Chairman and Vice Chairman of the County Election Board, the Secretary or employees of the Board may be involved in reception of voting devices, election supplies, and ballot transfer cases from Inspectors.”

OAC 230:35-3-91 (a) says, “On election night, the County Election Board shall canvas the precinct and absentee results for all elections including elections for which the county is an affected county.”

During the Jones election, neither Glover nor Williams were able to leave the “public” room to witness – or receive – any of the incoming precinct materials.  Neither were they allowed to witness, or review (canvas) any of the election materials during or after processing by Oklahoma County Election Board staff.

Tuesday morning (10:10am), December 12^th, Cheryl Williams had car trouble so I sat on the Board as the member. Glover and I were asked to “accept and process” 32 absentee ballots.  Both Glover and I were able to check the affidavits on the outer envelopes, but the ballots were removed from us to the counting room after that.

I requested that we be allowed to witness the counting of the absentee ballots as described by OAC 230:30-11-3 and was denied by Sanderson and Deputy Secretary Tuesday Sanders.  I refused to sign the seal [tape] for the box with the absentee ballots when it was presented to me for my signature because I wasn’t allowed to observe the counting of the ballots or see the ballots being placed in the box.  At one point, I even asked the Sheriff’s Deputy in the room to ask Secretary Sanderson to follow the law and was told, “I’m only an observer”.  Consequently, I abstained from the vote to “accept and process thirty-two (32) absentee ballots”.  It makes no sense that I should sign something saying I’ve seen something when I absolutely had not.

Secretary Sanderson takes the minutes of the meeting.  Unfortunately, none of my concerns were noted in the minutes of the December 12^th meeting, nor was there an auditory recording of the meeting made by the OK CO Election Board.

Tuesday evening (6:47pm), the Election Board assembled to canvas the ballots for that day’s elections. I stayed on the Board again that evening for Cheryl. At 7:36pm the meeting was recessed, and Deputy Sanders took Glover and I on a tour of the building to witness election night procedure. Sanders answered numerous questions I had and was extremely pleasant. The tour was very helpful in understanding the process. The meeting was then called back to order at 8:06pm.

At this time, Glover and I were allowed to observe the election machine tapes from each precinct involved in each election – something I had asked to do after the Jones elections where neither Glover nor Cheryl were given any evidence of the election other than the absentee affidavits.  David and I spot-checked tapes for accuracy – which was 100% – and I checked the tapes against the precinct list provided by Deputy Sanders.

I found that 10 precincts had 2 tapes (not all of which were spot-checked for accuracy) so I alerted Deputy Sanders who said that she would have to wait until all tapes had been numerically assembled at the end of the night to investigate this issue.  I also had no record of a tape for 1 precinct in the Edmond HD39 election.  (Friday, December 15^th, Sanders informed me that she could not find two tapes for any precinct and that another tape included in the results for which there was no precinct, was indeed a ‘training’ tape that had been mistakenly included by the precinct officials.  This information was also not included in the meeting minutes of the 12^th.)

Cheryl was in her seat on the OK CO Election Board Friday night, December 15^th when the results from the December 12^th elections were to be certified.  Because of the concerns enumerated above, Williams voted “no” to certify results and refused to sign any paperwork regarding election certification.

At this point in time Cheryl and I are asking for the following concerns to be addressed by state lawmakers and the OK CO Election Board:

1. Oklahoma Administrative Code and Oklahoma Law both refer to the “Oklahoma County Election Board” often as both the office and the 3-member board.  This is very confusing and needs to be made more specific in both law and code. Those hired by the Oklahoma County Election Board to help administrate an election have different duties than those appointed to the 3-person Oklahoma County Election Board and these duties should be specifically identified in both law and code.
2. The 3-member Election Board needs to become a 5 or 7-member board for several reasons:
   • If two Board members are together in the room, it constitutes a meeting according to the Oklahoma Open Meeting Act (25:304.2). This fact has been used to dampen transparency in several meetings I’ve attended as Secretary Sanderson has refused to answer public questions either during the meeting or after the meeting has been adjourned citing this particular issue.
   • It takes only two Board members to certify an election and one is the Secretary of the OK CO Election Board.  If one party has questions or concerns, those are negated by the Secretary and the other party’s appointee.  This can also dampen transparency and lead to concerns of partisanship in elections.  Adding voters of other parties, such as Independent voters, by random drawing of interested voters could stimulate transparency by putting more eyes on the process.
3. The Secretary of the OK CO Election Board is a voting member of the Board but should be relegated to a position of information for the Board and not a voting member for the reason listed in 2b.
4. There should be a meeting Secretary assigned to meetings of the Board and the meetings should be recorded via audio.
   • Secretary Sanderson conducts the meeting, writes the minutes of the meeting and performs his duties as Secretary during elections.
   • Minutes of the meetings are often incomplete as mentioned above.  Transparency hinges not only on proper procedure, but accurate and effective communication with the public.
5. The OK CO Election Board must follow the law as it is written in Title 25 of the Oklahoma Statutes and Title 230 of the Oklahoma Administrative Code.  Neither Cheryl nor I believe that the OK CO Election Board is following the OAC regarding Absentee voting.

I know that Cheryl and I are both willing to work with the OK CO Election Board in whatever way necessary to perform our Board duties, but are united together in the requirement that the OK CO Election Board be transparent in their actions and follow all pertinent State Law and Oklahoma Administrative Code in the performance of their required duties.