State Rep. Lee Snodgrass (D-Appleton) listens as Rep. Lindee Rae Brill (R-Sheboygan Falls) testifies about her bill to ban the use of absentee ballot drop boxes. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)

At a public hearing of the Wisconsin Assembly Committee on Campaigns and Elections Tuesday, legislators engaged in an occasionally tense debate over proposed changes to the state election system. 

In attendance at the hearing were some of Wisconsin’s most prominent election deniers, including former state Rep. Janel Brandtjen and Peter Bernegger, a self-styled elections investigator who has been convicted of mail fraud Bernegger stood in the back of the hearing room with a group of companions, muttering and complaining about assertions by the election clerks and legislators who testified. 

The committee heard testimony on bills that would prohibit the use of absentee ballot drop boxes, change the system for how “indefinitely confined voters” cast ballots, add a provision to state law that makes it a felony if election workers don’t allow election observers to exercise their rights and change the system for how state agencies manage voter registration data. 

The most heated part of the hearing came during the discussion of AB 560, authored by Rep. Lindee Rae Brill (R-Sheboygan Falls) and Sen. Andre Jacque (R-New Franken), which outlaws drop boxes. The use of drop boxes has been a politically charged issue since 2020, when right-wing groups started to allege they’re susceptible to fraud and “ballot harvesting” by outfits known as “ballot mills” that allegedly collect illegal ballots and stuff them into drop boxes in order to sway election results. There is no evidence such harvesting happens, though in Wisconsin it is now illegal for anyone other than a voter to return that voter’s absentee ballot. 

Since 2020, the drop box issue has been litigated in the court system more than once. In 2022, the then-conservative-controlled Wisconsin Supreme Court banned drop boxes. In 2024 the new liberal majority on the Court reversed that decision and drop boxes were allowed in last year’s presidential election. Municipal clerks are able to decide whether or not to use the boxes and the Wisconsin Elections Commission has issued guidance for best practices in securing them, but there are no laws on the books guiding how drop boxes should be managed. 

Brill cited incidents in Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Canada in which absentee ballot drop boxes were set on fire, saying those events show the need for the boxes to have security that the state of Wisconsin and its municipalities can’t afford to provide.

Democrats on the committee asked why isolated anecdotes on the west coast have anything to do with the administration of drop boxes in Wisconsin and argued that the reason many Wisconsinites still have doubts about the security of the state’s elections is because Republicans keep pushing the belief that something is amiss. 

“I would argue that the No. 1 reason that people may have a lack of confidence in the security of our elections is the discourse that conservative members of the Republican Party continue to put out there about fact versus fiction when it comes to actual election security and fraud,” Rep. Lee Snodgrass (D-Appleton) said. 

“I think it’s no secret that the people who are talking about elections being stolen or somehow insecure are people who are grabbing on to conspiracy theories that are not based in fact about actual incidences of election fraud in this country,” Snodgrass continued, citing a 2022 Associated Press survey of election officials about the security of drop boxes. 

“I don’t know that I consider that a valid source, Associated Press,” Brill replied. “I don’t always see everything from the Associated Press being absolutely valid, but that might be where you and I find truth in different spots. This might be where we’re finding facts in different locations.”

The criticism of Brill’s bill didn’t just come from the committee’s Democrats. Rep. Scott Krug (R-Nekoosa), who has often worked to broker compromise on election issues, questioned Brill’s choice to put forward the bill despite the near certainty that it will be vetoed by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers. 

Krug said if Republicans move forward with the bill and it passes both chambers only to be vetoed in early 2026 and then the state is left in the same position — drop boxes are allowed at the discretion of local election clerks without any rules or regulations guiding their use, security or procedures. 

“[This bill is] not going to change the Supreme Court’s opinion on drop boxes. It’s not going to change the governor’s opinion on drop boxes,” Krug said. “We still have a problem in our communities, and that’s what I’m trying to get to is, politically, where we are dealing with realities. We know that if this bill leaves this committee, goes to the floor, gets voted on, goes to the Senate, gets through committee, gets voted on in the Senate, goes to the governor’s desk, he vetoes it — then where are we with drop boxes?”

Brill said more than once that she doesn’t think Republicans in the Legislature should be trying to write election-related bills that can be signed into law by Evers. 

“I don’t believe that doing election integrity that the governor is going to sign is what Republicans should be doing,” she said. “I think election integrity is something that is a very divided issue, and I think we’re on the right side of this issue. So if the governor was going to say he was going to sign, I mean, I am a believer in God and follower of Jesus Christ, so do I believe that there’s a chance that he would change his mind and sign this into law? Sure, but I’m taking this head-on, because our Republican president believes this is the direction we should be heading.”

A number of election clerks also testified on the bill, questioning the assertion that drop boxes are less secure than U.S. Postal Service mailboxes and insisting that allegations of ballot harvesting are false. 

Indefinitely confined voters 

Since the 1970s, Wisconsin law has allowed voters to identify themselves as indefinitely confined, meaning they’re unable to leave the house to vote so their local election clerk automatically sends them an absentee ballot for each election. 

When the state instituted its voter ID law in 2011, indefinitely confined voters were exempted from its requirements. In 2020, the use of indefinitely confined status increased due to the COVID-19 pandemic, raising concerns among Republicans that the program is susceptible to fraud. 

AB 599 would end the indefinitely confined program by Jan. 1, 2029 and replace it with a program that allows voters with disabilities or illnesses to request that absentee ballots be automatically sent to them and provide proof of identification. That request would be valid until the ID’s expiration, at which time the voter will need to start the process again with their new ID. 

The bill’s Republican authors, Krug and Rep. Cindy Duchow (R-Town of Delafield), said the proposal was “not a rollback” but a “recalibration” of the system. But Democrats and advocates for people with disabilities argued the state has barriers that can make it difficult for people with disabilities to obtain a state-issued ID, mostly due to challenges with DMV hours and transportation access.

Election clerks testified that the bill pushes a major burden of added work onto the local clerks. 

Election observers

AB 426, authored by Rep. Paul Tittl, would penalize any election official who infringes on an election observer’s rights to be within three and eight feet of all aspects of the voting process with up to 90 days imprisonment in county jail and a fine of up to $1,000. 

Snodgrass pointed to a recently enacted administrative rule that guides the conduct of election observers and gives  election officials authority to manage observer conduct. She said the state should wait to see how the rules work before further tweaking the law. 

Voter data 

The committee also heard testimony on AB 595, authored by Krug, which would change how the state elections commission works with other agencies to share data such as a voter’s name and state ID number. Republicans have spent years complaining that the state voter registration list is full of errors. Democrats and election administration experts have said aggressive attempts to delete data from the statewide system would result in the disenfranchisement of Wisconsin voters. 

The bill would require the Department of Transportation and WEC to enter into a data-sharing agreement to match information in the possession of both agencies. 

Under current law, whenever a voter is no longer eligible to vote, for any reason, their file is changed to ineligible on the voter registration list but not removed. This prevents people from being removed in error and allows people to retain their voter registration file if they’re convicted of a felony and then can vote again after serving their sentence. 

Krug’s bill would remove people from the list once they’re declared ineligible. If someone is then eligible to vote again, they’d have to re-register. 

The bill would also require the Legislative Audit Bureau to conduct an audit every other year of the official voter list to search for registered voters who aren’t U.S. citizens. While Republicans have of fraud by non-citizen who illegally cast ballots, there is little proof it happens at a significant rate.

Krug said that a lot of election skeptics’ complaints have simmered for years without the ability to provide definitive answers about their validity because the data can’t be compiled, so his bill is trying to solve that. 

“Is it a widespread problem? No. Does it happen? Yes,” Krug said. “So that’s what I’m trying to figure out, is, what is that in between? What does it look like? … This is not a gotcha. I just want to be able to say, ‘OK, agency gave me data, I can show you that this isn’t a major problem,’ and then I can come up with solutions.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Reading Time: 2 minutes

Wisconsin candidates now have a path to get off the ballot besides dying, thanks to a proposal Gov. Tony Evers signed into law on Friday.

The proposal was triggered by 2024 presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s failed attempt to withdraw from the ballot in a bid to boost President Donald Trump’s candidacy. The case made its way to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which rejected Kennedy’s argument after a lower court ruled that death was the only way for nominees to drop off the ballot.

Under the measure that Evers, a Democrat, signed into law, candidates can now get off the ballot as long as they file to withdraw at least seven business days before the Wisconsin Elections Commission certifies candidates ahead of the August and November elections and pay processing fees to the Wisconsin Elections Commission. The measure doesn’t apply to the February and April elections.

Many county clerks had opposed an earlier version of the legislation because the originally proposed deadline to drop out would have disrupted tight timelines to prepare, print and send off ballots on time. That deadline would have allowed candidates to get off the ballot any time before the election commission certified candidates’ names.

To address those concerns, Rep. David Steffen, the Republican author of the measure, amended the proposal to require candidates to let the commission know at least seven business days ahead of time. The law also would charge anybody impersonating a candidate to get off the ballot with a felony.

The measure passed the Assembly with a voice vote. It passed the Senate 19-14, with just two Democratic votes in favor. 

Steffen called the new law a win for Wisconsin voters, adding in a statement that it will “reduce unnecessary voter confusion.”

Clerks say they can adjust to ballot law

The new law won’t change operations much, said Wood County Clerk Trent Miner, a Republican in a county of about 74,000. Miner’s office programs and prepares the county’s ballots, which he said would make readjusting the ballots easier.

La Crosse County Clerk Ginny Dankmeyer, a Democrat, said a candidate dropping out at the last minute would still lead to extra hours of work since ballots are generally ready to be printed by then. But Dankmeyer added that it’s still doable and won’t stress her out. She said the new deadline is far better than the originally proposed one.

The Wisconsin law prohibiting withdrawal in cases besides death stood out nationwide as unusually strict. The state used to allow nominees to drop off the ballot if they declined to run, but it changed the policy in 1977 to the one that was active until Evers signed the new law last week.

Many other states allow nominees to drop off the ballot between 60 and 85 days before an election. Some states require polling places to have notices clarifying candidates’ withdrawal if they drop out after ballots are already printed.

Kennedy’s attempt to get off the ballot last year shocked clerks, who had already printed their ballots when his case was moving through the courts. 

His lawyers requested that clerks cover up his name on the ballot with stickers, a proposal that clerks said could lead to tabulator jams and disenfranchised voters. Kennedy still received 17,740 votes, or about 0.5% of the vote. Trump won the state by a little less than a percentage point.

Votebeat is a nonprofit news organization reporting on voting access and election administration across the U.S. Sign up for Votebeat Wisconsin’s free newsletter here.

Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Shur at ashur@votebeat.org.

Wisconsin candidates have path off the ballot besides death under new law is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Voting carrels set up at Madison's Hawthorne Library on Election Day 2022. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)

The Wisconsin Department of Justice on Monday filed an appeal of a Waukesha County Circuit Court judge’s decision to require that state election officials conduct an intensive search for registered voters who aren’t citizens. 

Judge Michael Maxwell’s Oct. 6 ruling required that the Wisconsin Elections Commission cross reference its voter registration list against the state Department of Transportation’s records to determine people’s citizenship status when they applied for a driver’s license or state ID. He also ordered that WEC and local election clerks stop accepting new voter registrations without obtaining proof of citizenship — though that portion of the ruling was put on hold pending the appeal. 

Under current law, people registering to vote must affirm they are U.S. citizens but are not required to provide proof. However, lying about citizenship status while registering to vote is a crime. 

Fears of non-citizen voting have frequently been raised by Republicans in recent years who, since 2020, have expressed  skepticism of election administration. The initial Waukesha County lawsuit was brought by a pair of right-wing election conspiracy theorists. 

While claims of non-citizen voting revolve around the threat that the issue could swing an election result and occasionally cases are found and prosecuted, there is no evidence that non-citizens vote in substantial enough numbers to influence election results in Wisconsin or anywhere across the country. 

In the appeal, filed in the Madison-based District IV, the DOJ argued that the ruling “reshapes Wisconsin election law” while leaving many details vague and potentially violating other laws. 

“The circuit court’s decision and order drastically alters voter registration and elections in Wisconsin, violates state law, and threatens voting rights,” the appeal states.

Lead by Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul, the filing states that Maxwell’s requirement to match data with Department of Transportation records would be based on data that’s up to eight years old, which could result in the disenfranchisement of people who were legal residents when they applied for their driver’s license but have since become citizens with the right to vote. 

The appeal also argues that Maxwell’s ruling orders local election officials to change their practices even though they weren’t a party to the lawsuit and does not outline what “proof of citizenship” election officials should use to register people to vote. 

“The court issued this sweeping relief despite no evidence of injury to Respondents: they speculated about the risk of vote dilution by illegal voters, but provided no evidence that a noncitizen had voted or registered to vote in Wisconsin,” the appeal states.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Reading Time: 5 minutes

The Wisconsin Elections Commission on Friday appealed a Waukesha County judge’s order requiring election officials to verify the citizenship of all registered voters and people seeking to register.

Attorneys for the Wisconsin Department of Justice wrote that the Waukesha County Circuit Court decision was “impermissively vague” and would require election officials to disregard multiple voter registration laws.

The appeal follows a request for a stay, filed last week, in which the attorneys told the court it would be virtually impossible for the election commission to implement Judge Michael Maxwell’s decision by the February statewide election, and that it would illegally have to shut down online voter registration in the meantime. 

In response, Maxwell stayed the part of his ruling that required citizenship verification for new registrants, but let stand the part requiring the Wisconsin Elections Commission to verify the citizenship of all currently registered voters.

Maxwell’s ruling did not specify how the commission should go about verifying the citizenship of registered voters: whether it should check them against other databases, confirm that they properly attested under oath to their citizenship when they registered, or demand documentary proof from registered voters, as some other states now require.

The case has further escalated a political debate in Wisconsin over how to ensure that only citizens can vote. Last fall, Wisconsin voters overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment to ban voting by noncitizens across the state, and other states enacted similar bans. 

Across the country, Republicans have also been pushing for laws requiring documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote, on the grounds that they’re needed to prevent noncitizen voting.

But there’s no evidence of widespread voting by noncitizens, and a Votebeat analysis and other studies have shown that such requirements can disenfranchise eligible U.S. citizens.

Wisconsin has lagged behind other states in seeking such measures through legislation, but the case in Maxwell’s Waukesha County court has sped up bill writing on the issue. Since his early October court ruling, Republicans have introduced a bill requiring an audit of potential noncitizens on the voter rolls, and directing election officials to compare those rolls against state and federal citizenship data, and they have raised the issue in political campaigns.

When Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul, who’s seeking reelection, filed a motion for a stay on Maxwell’s decision, Republican U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany — now running for governor — accused Democrats on social media of wanting “illegal aliens voting.” 

That talking point has dominated conservative talk radio, while Democrats have stayed mostly quiet outside court filings. 

How the state has responded to the lawsuit

The lawsuit in Maxwell’s court, filed last year by a Pewaukee resident represented by conservative attorneys, seeks to require citizenship verification checks of all new registrants and to require the Wisconsin Department of Transportation to provide the Wisconsin Elections Commission with its data on citizenship so that it can compare them against the voter roll. 

Maxwell ruled Oct. 3 that the election commission was failing to ensure only lawful voters remained on the rolls, citing statutes limiting voting to citizens. He ordered the agency to check for noncitizens by February, but didn’t specify how, other than suggesting a match with DOT data, as the plaintiffs demand. 

The election commission has told the court that there’s no state law requiring documentary proof of citizenship.

Kaul, the attorney general, has argued in court that launching a citizenship verification program before next year’s elections would be unfeasible, and that relying on DOT data that may be inaccurate could wrongly disenfranchise newly naturalized citizens. In the appeal, Justice Department attorneys said Maxwell’s ruling could disenfranchise eligible voters unable to meet Maxwell’s “undefined verification criteria” and lead Wisconsin’s 1,850 clerks to apply inconsistent standards.

Bryna Godar, a staff attorney at the University of Wisconsin Law School’s State Democracy Research Initiative, said Maxwell’s decision conflicts with Wisconsin election law, which calls for requiring proof of certain qualifications to vote, like residence, but not others, including citizenship, competence, or clean criminal record.

Existing laws already deter noncitizens from voting, Godar argued. “Noncitizens who register to vote face criminal liability under state law,” he said, “and if they vote, it also renders them permanently inadmissible under federal immigration law, which means deportation and other immigration consequences.”

Flawed tools for citizenship verification

There’s no standardized method used in states that require or retroactively check for proof of citizenship, but two methods have been recommended for Wisconsin for already registered voters.

The first is to check the voter rolls against citizenship records held by other state agencies, such as driver’s license information, as the plaintiffs in the Waukesha County case have suggested.

But the state Department of Transportation has told the court that its citizenship data can be inaccurate and outdated.The department records applicants’ citizenship status based on their proof of citizenship or legal residence at the time the license is issued. Those cards typically remain valid for eight years, and current state law doesn’t require applicants to update their citizenship status with the department if it changes during that time. 

Because many people become U.S. citizens well before their licenses expire, the department’s data can quickly become outdated — a problem that grows as the number of naturalizations spikes ahead of major elections, a Wisconsin Department of Justice official said in a court hearing last October.

Another method that some states use — and that conservative legal groups such as the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty recommend — is to use the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services’ SAVE program. SAVE is a search tool designed for states to check whether their residents qualify for certain public-benefit programs, but the Trump administration has encouraged states to use it for checking voter rolls as well.

But its data can also be incomplete and outdated, according to an analysis by the Brennan Center for Justice, which found it should be “considered useful, but not definitive” for citizenship verification. 

Jasleen Singh, counsel for the Brennan Center’s voting rights program, told Votebeat the SAVE database includes only immigrants known to the U.S. government. Undocumented immigrants who haven’t interacted with federal agencies wouldn’t appear, and citizens born before 1978 may also be missing, since the Social Security Administration didn’t collect citizenship data until then.

What citizenship checks in other states have turned up

Louisiana ran its voter rolls through the SAVE program this year as part of an investigation into noncitizen voters. It found 390 potential noncitizens in records going back to the 1980s, including 79 people who voted at least once in that period. That’s a minuscule share of Louisiana’s registered voters.

Democrats say these figures show noncitizen voting is rare enough that it doesn’t need a blunt legislative solution that could disenfranchise anyone. But Republicans argue that even a single illegally cast ballot undermines election integrity.

In Arizona, those who haven’t shown proof of citizenship can vote only in federal elections. About 35,000 people as of last December, or just under 1% of the state’s voters, are on this “federal only” voter roll. A Votebeat analysis found these voters are concentrated on Native land, college campuses, and near the state’s main homeless campus; they tend to be younger, and vote at lower rates. 

In Texas, about 1% of the voting-age population lacks proof of citizenship and another 6% would struggle to locate it, according to a University of Maryland study, which found Black, Latino, young, and Republican voters are particularly likely to face those challenges.

The Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty has proposed a multistep noncitizen audit — including matching voter rolls against DOT data as well as the SAVE database, checking for discrepancies, and then providing time for flagged voters to provide citizenship proof. Republican state Rep. Scott Krug, a Republican, introduced a proposal this month requiring a noncitizen audit that follows these steps.

Mequon City Clerk Caroline Fuchs already follows a similar process, using the DOT database to check registrants’ citizenship and sending flagged names to a U.S. Department of Homeland Security contact. She said the agent found about a dozen voters incorrectly marked as noncitizens in the DOT database, but none of those identified by DHS disputed the finding.

Fuchs told Votebeat in early October that she was pleased to see the Waukesha County judge’s order, but said she and other clerks weren’t rushing to implement it since they knew it would be appealed.

Votebeat is a nonprofit news organization reporting on voting access and election administration across the U.S. Sign up for Votebeat Wisconsin’s free newsletter here.

Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Alexander at ashur@votebeat.org.

Wisconsin officials appeal judge’s order on checking voters’ citizenship is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

A judge ordered the Wisconsin Elections Commission to verify the citizenship of all voters in time for the next election in February, and determine whether any noncitizens are registered. (Photo by Alex Shur / Votebeat)

This article was originally published by Votebeat, a nonprofit news organization covering local election administration and voting access.

Votebeat is a nonprofit news organization reporting on voting access and election administration across the U.S. Sign up for Votebeat Wisconsin’s free newsletter here.

What happened?

A Waukesha County judge on Friday ordered the Wisconsin Elections Commission to determine whether any noncitizens are registered to vote and to stop accepting voter registrations without verifying that the applicant is a U.S. citizen.

What’s the dispute?

A Pewaukee resident, represented by conservative attorneys, filed a lawsuit last year seeking to require the election commission to verify citizenship of registered voters and applicants. The suit also sought to force the Wisconsin Department of Transportation to compare its citizenship information against voter rolls.

The election commission opposed the initial request, saying that no state law called for requiring documented proof of citizenship. It also argued that the DOT has no obligation to match citizenship data with voter records.

Waukesha County Circuit Court Judge Michael Maxwell rejected the commission’s argument, saying that the agency is failing in its duty to ensure that only lawful voters make it to the voter roll. He cited several statutes that he said made clear that only citizens could cast a ballot.

Maxwell didn’t specify how the election commission and local clerks should verify citizenship of new registrants, or how the commission should check for noncitizens on the voter rolls. He only called for the parties to figure out a plan, whether that be through matching the DOT’s citizenship data or using “other lawfully available means.” He called for that process to be substantially completed before the next statewide election, which is February.

Currently, applicants for voter registration in Wisconsin and most other states must attest, under penalty of perjury, that they are U.S. citizens who are eligible to vote, but they are not required to present proof of citizenship.

The issue of noncitizen voting has been hotly debated in recent years, though no widespread instances have been found. Republicans have used the concern to call for citizenship proof checks of all voters, even as data shows that such measures risk disenfranchising some U.S. citizens.

Republicans praised the decision, with state Rep. Amanda Nedweski calling it a “great win for election integrity.”

Democrats and the respondents in the case were largely mum.

Election commission spokesperson Emilee Miklas didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. Riley Vetterkind, a spokesperson for the Wisconsin Department of Justice, which represents the commission and Department of Transportation, declined to say whether the agencies would appeal the decision.

Who are the parties?

The current plaintiffs, Pewaukee resident Ardis Cerny and Waukesha resident Annette Kuglitsch, sued the election commission, Department of Transportation, and officials in both agencies. They have argued that the election commission is violating their voting rights by not checking for noncitizens already registered to vote and seeking to vote.

Maxwell agreed, saying they “have a clear legal right to not have their votes diluted by a non-citizen casting an unlawful ballot.”

What happens now?

It’s unclear how the commission would verify the citizenship of all of Wisconsin’s registered voters by February. Bryna Godar, a staff attorney at the University of Wisconsin Law School’s State Democracy Research Initiative, said the decision will “definitely be appealed” and that the lower-court decision could be stayed while the appeal goes through the courts.

If the case reaches the Wisconsin Supreme Court, the liberal majority could overturn the order of the conservative-leaning Waukesha County Circuit Court.

Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Alexander at ashur@votebeat.org.

Votebeat is a nonprofit news organization covering local election integrity and voting access. Sign up for their newsletters here.

Reading Time: 2 minutes

A Waukesha County judge on Friday ordered the Wisconsin Elections Commission to determine whether any noncitizens are registered to vote and to stop accepting voter registrations without verifying that the applicant is a U.S. citizen.

A Pewaukee resident, represented by conservative attorneys, filed a lawsuit last year seeking to require the election commission to verify citizenship of registered voters and applicants. The suit also sought to force the Wisconsin Department of Transportation to compare its citizenship information against voter rolls.

The election commission opposed the initial request, saying that no state law called for requiring documented proof of citizenship. It also argued that the DOT has no obligation to match citizenship data with voter records.

Waukesha County Circuit Court Judge Michael Maxwell rejected the commission’s argument, saying that the agency is failing in its duty to ensure that only lawful voters make it to the voter rolls. He cited several statutes that he said made clear that only citizens could cast a ballot.

Maxwell didn’t specify how the election commission and local clerks should verify citizenship of new registrants, or how the commission should check for noncitizens on the voter rolls. He only called for the parties to figure out a plan, whether that be through matching the DOT’s citizenship data or using “other lawfully available means.” He called for that process to be substantially completed before the next statewide election, which is February.

Currently, applicants for voter registration in Wisconsin and most other states must attest, under penalty of perjury, that they are U.S. citizens who are eligible to vote, but they are not required to present proof of citizenship.

The issue of noncitizen voting has been hotly debated in recent years, though no widespread instances have been found. Republicans have used the concern to call for citizenship proof checks of all voters, even as data shows that such measures risk disenfranchising some U.S. citizens.

Republicans praised the decision, with state Rep. Amanda Nedweski calling it a “great win for election integrity.”

Democrats and the respondents in the case were largely mum.

Election commission spokesperson Emilee Miklas didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. Riley Vetterkind, a spokesperson for the Wisconsin Department of Justice, which represents the commission and the Department of Transportation, declined to say whether the agencies would appeal the decision.

The current plaintiffs, Pewaukee resident Ardis Cerny and Waukesha resident Annette Kuglitsch, sued the election commission, the Department of Transportation and officials in both agencies. They have argued that the election commission is violating their voting rights by not checking for noncitizens already registered to vote and seeking to vote. 

Maxwell agreed, saying they “have a clear legal right to not have their votes diluted by a non-citizen casting an unlawful ballot.”

It’s unclear how the commission would verify the citizenship of all of Wisconsin’s registered voters by February. Bryna Godar, a staff attorney at the University of Wisconsin Law School’s State Democracy Research Initiative, said the decision will “definitely be appealed” and that the lower-court decision could be stayed while the appeal goes through the courts.

If the case reaches the Wisconsin Supreme Court, the liberal majority could overturn the order of the conservative-leaning Waukesha County Circuit Court.

Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Shur at ashur@votebeat.org.

Votebeat is a nonprofit news organization reporting on voting access and election administration across the U.S. Sign up for Votebeat Wisconsin’s free newsletter here.

Wisconsin must verify citizenship of registered voters and new applicants, judge rules is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Assembly Republican and Democratic authors announced competing bills at a joint press conference last week. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Wisconsin lawmakers are once again trying to make changes to the state’s elections system, including allowing elections clerks to start processing absentee ballots the day before Election Day, though partisan divisions on how the changes should be made are already showing. 

Assembly Republican and Democratic authors announced competing bills at a joint press conference last week, saying they are starting a conversation around the proposals and aim to get them done this session. It’s unclear whether those conversations will end in new laws ahead of the 2026 elections, which will include a spring Supreme Court election, a high-profile, open race for governor and state legislative races where control is up for grabs. 

“There’s not a lot new in here,” Assistant Majority Leader Scott Krug (R-Rome) said. “We’ve gone through a lot of these things before, but we’re here to talk about things that should matter to every Wisconsinite, whether you’re Republican, Democrat or independent, about having faith and confidence in your elections from the beginning of the process all the way through to the end.”

Krug said his proposals would help ensure three things for voters: the “person who’s voting next to them is who they say they are,” that the “person is eligible to vote” and that they know “who won the damn election before they go to bed.”

One bill, Krug said, would take a “comprehensive look at how we approach absentee voting in the state of Wisconsin.” This would include allowing for processing of absentee ballots to start on the  Monday before Election Day and regulating drop boxes in Wisconsin. 

“Absentee voting is here to stay, so we want to make sure that we include a process where we can actually get these results across the finish line before we go to bed,” Krug said. He added that by pairing the issue with drop boxes regulations in his new bill he hopes it will “draw all legislators to the table.”  

Election clerks have called for change for years. Currently in Wisconsin, elections workers aren’t allowed to start processing absentee ballots until 7 a.m. on Election Day. This has led to extended processing times, especially in the larger cities including Milwaukee — bolstering suspicions among  Republicans since 2018 about  late night “ballot dumps” in Democratic cities. 

Despite passing the Assembly, a bill to implement Monday processing died last legislative session due to opposition in the Senate. 

In addition to reviving Monday processing, Krug promoted new standards for drop boxes.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court reversed a decision that had banned drop boxes in Wisconsin until the new ruling in July 2024. Some Republicans, though not Krug, were critical of the decision. 

“People who are in our communities who see drop boxes on the corner want to know if they have security, that they have standards, that they’re being used the same across the state of Wisconsin,” Krug said. “I know we don’t all agree on what those provisions and those standards should be, but we’ll have a good conversation about that.”

Another bill, Krug said, would eliminate the “ballot drawdown” process from Wisconsin statute and replace it with a process known as “risk-limiting audits.” The drawdown is used when there is a numerical discrepancy and as a result a ballot may be randomly selected and removed from the vote count. 

“Clerical errors can lead to an actually legal ballot being tossed out,” Krug said. “We’ve got to get rid of the drawdown.”

Risk limiting audits are a statistically based audit technique, which audits a certain number of ballots depending on the margin of victory in a given election, has been growing in popularity in recent years, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

The bill language for Krug’s first two bills is not available.

Krug said AB 312, which was introduced earlier this year, is also included in his package. The bill would require absentee voting sites to be open for at least 20 hours during the period for voting absentee in-person. 

“There’s going to be a limited number of session days going into the fall and spring,” Krug said, adding that it could be difficult to get “27 or 30 election bills” across the finish line individually. 

“Time is of the essence,” Krug said for getting the changes done before 2026 fall elections.

While the lawmakers held their press conference jointly, Rep. Lee Snodgrass (D-Appleton) said she is not currently supportive of Krug’s bills but that having the conversation is important. 

“I think it’s over bloated,” Snodgrass said about Krug’s “Monday processing” proposal. “I’d like to see a cleaner bill.”

“We are meeting the moment. Our country, and our state has never been more divided and more contentious. The partisan divide has become not just contentious, but even hostile,” Snodgrass said, adding that she and Krug want to “model that civil conversations in debate can happen in the same room, from the same podium and with the same goal in mind despite diverging ideas.” 

Senate Democrat critical of Krug’s legislation

In addition to Assembly Democrats not being on board with Republican election proposals, there already appear to be some obstacles in the Senate.

While speaking to reporters after the Assembly press conference, Sen. Mark Spreitzer (D-Beloit) criticized Krug’s Monday processing proposal, saying he was “very disappointed” with the new version as it contains a “poison pills” meant to satisfy the right-wing portion of his party. 

“The Monday processing concept has always been a good idea on its own merits, but it’s never been about the right to vote. It has always been about efficiencies for our clerks and our election officials to process ballots more smoothly,” Spreitzer said. “None of those things are about voting rights, and I’m not willing to trade those things for undermining people’s voting rights.” 

Spreitzer said the dropbox restrictions are “nonstarters” that would “functionally ban them in most communities.” A bill draft, according to VoteBeat, includes a ban on clerks fixing errors on ballots and guidelines for dropboxes, including where to place them, how to secure them, how to collect ballots and how to keep records of when they’re emptied as well as requiring they be under a continuous, livestreamed video feed. 

“I don’t know where these ideas are coming from, but it’s got to be from the extreme part of the Republican caucus, and I just don’t think these are what we should be putting forward related to our elections,” Spreitzer said. 

Spreitzer said Monday processing may not happen until Democrats have control, given the recent version of the bill.

“It may mean that we need to wait for a Democratic majority to pass this,” Spreitzer said. Senate Republicans currently hold a 17-15 majority. Democrats are hoping to change that in 2026 and need to win at least two additional seats to flip control of the chamber for the first time in over 15 years.

Waiting would delay any changes to 2027 at the earliest. 

Democratic bills

Snodgrass, alongside three of her Assembly Democratic colleagues, introduced proposals that have overlapping goals with Krug’s legislation last week.

Snodgrass said the Democratic package is meant to focus on “strengthening our democracy” by increasing access, educating people and providing the resources necessary to ensure that all eligible electors can vote. She said they specifically want to remove barriers to voting, not impose them.

One bill would require elected state officials to serve as poll workers during their first term and once every three years after that to help increase their understanding of the state’s election administration. 

“There’s no better way of learning than doing so,” Snodgrass said, adding that the bill would help elected officials be a “voice to talk about how Wisconsin’s elections are secure.” 

A pair of bills seek to ensure that polling places and voting are more accessible by requiring that election officials have one hour of voter accessibility training, and requiring election officials use the Wisconsin Elections Commission’s accessibility checklist at each polling place and uniform signs with  instructions for curbside voting. Several of the bills focus on helping young people in the state participate in elections. 

One bill would require that at least one special school registration deputy be present at each public high school in the state so eligible students can register to vote at school during the day. One bill would require high schools to give voter registration forms and nonpartisan voting information to students who are eligible to vote. 

The Department of Public Instruction would be required, under one bill, to develop a curriculum on the electoral process and voting. The agency would also have to mandate at least one hour of voter education instruction annually for K-12 students. 

“Too often, young people want to get involved, but don’t know how,” Rep. Jodi Emerson (D-Eau Claire) said. “By making voter registration and civic information part of the high school experience, we eliminate barriers and send a clear message, your voice matters, and your vote counts. This bill is not about partisanship. It’s about participation. It’s about preparing students to step confidently into adulthood, not just as graduates, but as citizens ready to shape their communities and their future.”

The package also includes a constitutional amendment proposal that would allow 17-year-olds to vote in primaries if they will be 18 by the general election. Another bill would allow 16- and 17-year-olds to preregister to vote if they turn 18 before the next election.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Reading Time: 3 minutes

Wisconsin’s controversial practice of randomly removing ballots to resolve discrepancies between the number of ballots and the number of voters would be prohibited under new draft legislation that requires meticulous audits in every county.

The draft proposal, obtained by Votebeat from Republican Rep. Scott Krug, will be formally released this week. Krug said the proposed ban on removing random ballots, known as drawdowns, was inspired largely by a Votebeat investigation highlighting election officials’ reluctance to use the practice and questions about its constitutionality.

“That practice undermines public trust,” Krug said, calling drawdowns “outdated.”

Wisconsin’s law allowing drawdowns is almost as old as the state, and it appears to be used most often in recounts. Other states have had similar laws, but most have repealed them. 

Drawdowns occur when records show more ballots cast than the number of voters who cast ballots. These discrepancies usually stem from minor recordkeeping errors or process mistakes.

For example, if poll workers discover an absentee ballot envelope was improperly filled out but had already been separated from its ballot, the ballot still counts, leaving more ballots than valid voters. Because ballots are generally unidentifiable, the law would call for election officials to remove one ballot at random.

Multiple Wisconsin clerks have told Votebeat that they loathe the practice, and national election experts have been flabbergasted that it exists. 

A legislative study committee in 2005 questioned the practice’s constitutionality without resolving the issue. Courts have similarly scrutinized its use. The Wisconsin Elections Commission has said a drawdown should be reserved as a last resort “when you cannot explain why you have more ballots than voters.”

Sam Liebert, Wisconsin state director of the group All Voting Is Local and a former clerk, said he once had to conduct a drawdown. He called it “one of the most gut-wrenching things I think I’ve ever done.”

“Every one of those ballots — it’s an American citizen’s hopes and dreams of the candidate or candidates that they want to represent them,” he said.

Although drawdowns are rare and usually limited to recounts, they’ve drawn national attention.

When President Donald Trump tried to overturn the results of the 2020 election in Wisconsin, his team invoked the law to seek a drawdown of 220,000 absentee ballots in Dane and Milwaukee counties, calling the practice “the only legally available remedy” to account for what it alleged were unlawfully cast ballots. The Wisconsin Supreme Court narrowly rejected the effort.

Other states typically require officials to explain discrepancies rather than resolve them by discarding ballots. Krug’s legislation would require exactly that — for election officials to document the discrepancy and record the number and type of excess ballots.

Proposal would require risk-limiting audits

The bill also requires risk-limiting audits, a kind of post-election review designed to give statistical confidence that votes are accurately tallied.

In these audits, workers review a statistically significant sample of ballots that should mirror the vote totals. If the sample doesn’t align with official results within the allowed margin of error, officials review more ballots until it does. The number of selected ballots varies from election to election, depending on how close a race is and how many ballots were cast. 

The math behind risk-limiting audits is complex, but election experts and officials have long supported the practice. 

Jennifer Morrell, CEO of The Elections Group, a consulting firm, said she has long promoted risk-limiting audits because they can include more ballots than other reviews. They can be laborious in close races but less burdensome in lopsided ones.

Morrell said jurisdictions that have implemented risk-limiting audits have become better at accounting for their ballots and reconciling vote totals, knowing that any issues would become obvious during an audit.

Liebert, from All Voting is Local, called risk-limiting audits “an effective way to ensure a correct count and detect any statistical anomalies,” while boosting voter confidence.

Closer races require larger samples, and in very tight contests, such audits may require a full hand count. Rock County Clerk Lisa Tollefson said that could happen often, as races across the county tend to be quite close.

Krug’s proposal calls for county clerks to perform a risk-limiting audit for the contest garnering the most votes at each general or spring election before they certify the election results. It also calls for an additional audit of a random contest in those elections that the Wisconsin Elections Commission selects.

A pilot program would begin in 2026, with full implementation in 2027.

Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Shur at ashur@votebeat.org.

Votebeat is a nonprofit news organization reporting on voting access and election administration across the U.S. Sign up for Votebeat Wisconsin’s free newsletter here.

Wisconsin bill would repeal ‘outdated’ ballot drawdown law and require risk-limiting audits is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 4 minutes

The Wisconsin Elections Commission ordered Madison election officials to follow several specific election procedures to ensure that ballots don’t go missing again in the capital city, rejecting arguments by the interim clerk that the orders may exceed the agency’s legal authority. 

The commission’s 5-1 vote Friday came a month after it withheld a first set of proposed orders amid pushback from Madison and Dane County officials and asked the city to propose its own remedies. Madison interim Clerk Mike Haas said the specificity of the commission’s original proposed orders “would set a troubling precedent.”

The city did submit its proposals, but the commission rejected them as overly broad and finalized orders that were largely similar to the ones it proposed in July, with some minor revisions, including citations of the legal basis for each order.  

The orders require Madison officials to create an internal plan detailing which election task is assigned to which employee; print pollbooks no earlier than the Tuesday before each election; develop a detailed record to track absentee ballots; and search through election materials for missing ballots before the city’s election canvassing board meets to finalize results.

The WEC action responds to lapses by the Madison clerk’s office, then headed by Clerk Maribeth Witzel-Behl, after the November 2024 presidential election, when staffers lost track of 193 ballots and did not report finding them until well past the state deadline for counting. The commission launched its investigation into the matter in January.

Clerk’s cookie baking factored into commissioners’ discussion

During discussions ahead of the vote, Commissioner Don Millis, a Republican, cited Votebeat’s reporting that Witzel-Behl spent a long post-election vacation at home — not on an out-of-state trip, as he had believed — baking thousands of cookies when some lost ballots were discovered. That, he said, factored into his vote for stricter orders.

“She couldn’t be bothered to turn off the oven, to come to the office to figure out if the Ward 65 ballots could be counted,” he said. “The failure to mention that the clerk was readily available to address this issue, along with the fact that none of the city officials we depose felt it was their job to get the ballots counted, makes me even more determined that the Commission must impose the directions in our order.”

Similarly, commission Chair Ann Jacobs, a Democrat, said it was “peculiar” that clerk’s office staff never told commissioners during their monthslong investigation that they rented cars on city time to deliver cookies after the ballot discovery. 

Those deposed “were all part of the cookie crew,” she said ahead of her vote. “Why didn’t they tell us about that? Why didn’t the city of Madison ever mention this? Why did nobody bring this up?” 

In a memo circulated ahead of the meeting, commission staff said the scope of the error “warrants a detailed order from the Commission correcting (Witzel-Behl’s) office’s policies and procedures, and ensuring those issues are actually fixed before the next statewide election.”

Haas, who was formerly the commission administrator, disagreed with the original proposed orders. He said the commission’s authority “does not extend to requiring the future implementation of specific procedures in excess of those required in the statutes.”

But commission staff pushed back, calling it “unreasonable and absurd” to read state law as barring the commission from ordering specific remedies.

In some cases, the commissioners made the requirements more stringent than what Madison proposed, but more lenient than the commission’s originally proposed orders.

For example, one order the commission initially proposed would have required Madison to print pollbooks no sooner than the Thursday before Election Day, despite state law calling on officials only to have the “most current official registration list.” Haas requested an order more in line with what state law outlines, printing the ballots as close to Election Day as possible.

The final order sets the deadline for printing pollbooks on the Tuesday before Election Day — two days earlier than first proposed — and requires that they be delivered no later than the Friday before the election.

Witzel-Behl’s office printed pollbooks for the two wards that lost ballots on Oct. 23, nearly two weeks before Election Day. The commission said printing that early made it harder for officials to track absentee ballots returned before Election Day and harder for poll workers to see how many ballots went uncounted.

Interim clerk’s objections to the commission’s order

Haas, who took over as interim clerk after Witzel-Behl was suspended in March, told Votebeat on the Tuesday ahead of the meeting that it was “way too early” to think about whether Madison would appeal the commission’s orders in court. In a statement after Friday’s vote, he said he was grateful that the commission altered some orders after the city’s feedback.

“The question is which level of government is best suited and authorized to determine specific procedures that work for the municipality in going above and beyond what the statutes require,” he told Votebeat. “We look forward to working with the Commission to ensure compliance with state law.”

Mark Thomsen, a Democratic commissioner, said he wasn’t comfortable with the agency beating up on Madison over mistakes made under a former clerk when a new permanent clerk hasn’t yet been hired.

At the meeting, Thomsen said he was uncomfortable imposing burdens on a new clerk that “no one else has to follow.”

“This order seems spiteful, and I don’t want to go there,” he said, before casting the lone dissent. Republicans Millis, Bob Spindell and Marge Bostelmann joined Democrats Carrie Riepl and Jacobs in approving the orders.

State law allows the commission to “require any election official to conform his or her conduct to the law, restrain an official from taking any action inconsistent with the law or require an official to correct any action or decision inconsistent with the law.”

Many of the orders, such as assigning specific staff to each election task, are not explicitly mentioned in statute.

Addressing claims that the orders were too detailed, commission staff attorney Angela O’Brien Sharpe said, “If the Legislature intended for the commission to only be able to issue general orders, they would have written a law to say just that.”

In a statement following the vote, Madison Mayor Satya Rhodes-Conway said the city is reorganizing the office to improve efficiency and accountability.

“We appreciate the Wisconsin Elections Commission considering our input and amending its orders to reflect that feedback,” she said. “I hope the WEC’s investigation can help inform best practices for election clerks around the state.” 

Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Shur at ashur@votebeat.org.

Votebeat is a nonprofit news organization reporting on voting access and election administration across the U.S. Sign up for Votebeat Wisconsin’s free newsletter here.

Wisconsin Elections Commission finalizes specific orders for Madison to follow to avoid ballot errors is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 3 minutes

Members of the Wisconsin Elections Commission expressed alarm Thursday at how much time former Madison Clerk Maribeth Witzel-Behl spent on vacation while a crisis was erupting in her office: the discovery of 193 missing ballots from the November 2024 election that never got counted.

In its 400-page investigative report, finalized at a meeting by a 5-1 vote, the commission said that Witzel-Behl began her vacation in mid-November, days after the election, “and then had little to do with the supervision of her office until almost a month later.” No staffers took responsibility during the extended absence, the commission chair, Democrat Ann Jacobs, complained before the vote. The missing ballots were not reported to the commission until mid-December. 

Records obtained by Votebeat provide some clarity into what Witzel-Behl was doing around the time: baking thousands of cookies and calling on her staff to help deliver them.

Most of that activity began after Dec. 2, when the second batch of uncounted ballots was found.

These records have not been publicly reported and were not included in the investigative report finalized Thursday.

“This is remarkable,” Republican Commissioner Don Millis said when Votebeat showed him some of the findings. “None of the witnesses we deposed disclosed her cookie staycation.”

After approving the report, the commission voted 4-2 to delay action on proposed corrective orders after city and county officials argued that the requirements were overly specific and exceeded state law. The city now has until Aug. 7 to provide a more complete response to the recommendations, and a follow-up meeting has been scheduled for Aug. 15.

Witzel-Behl didn’t respond to a request for comment. 

‘Cookie extravaganza’ featuring ‘100 different types’

Emails show that Witzel-Behl took time off for all or part of 17 days between Nov. 11 and Dec. 6 and said, according to an event invite, that part of it was for “devoting a staycation to baking.” 

Beginning in November, she invited city staff and election officials in Madison to what some staff called a “cookie extravaganza” held on Dec. 7, a Saturday, to help decorate cookies and take some home for their families. She baked “100 different types” of cookies, the invite said.

According to the commission, Witzel-Behl knew about the first batch of ballots on Nov. 12. That was well before the cookie event.

The second batch of uncounted ballots was discovered on Dec. 2 by office staff. Witzel-Behl was out of the office that day and for the rest of that week. She told the commission she learned of the second batch of ballots on Dec. 10. “While on vacation, she did not inquire of her staff whether there were absentee ballots in the bag,” the report reads. 

On Dec. 10, she sent an email to three staffers, including Deputy Clerk Jim Verbick, saying she’d reserved three cars for cookie deliveries. “Maybe each of you can make at least one cookie delivery to a library,” she wrote. 

She also arranged additional deliveries and rented more cars for later the following week, an email sent Dec. 13 shows. “We still have several packages of cookies, so feel free to pick a few agencies for another delivery,” she suggested to 16 staffers across her office and other city departments the same day.

“I had assumed — obviously erroneously — the clerk was vacationing in some faraway place,” Millis told Votebeat, denouncing Witzel-Behl for not personally managing the discovery of the uncounted ballots.

The clerk’s staff didn’t tell the commission about the missing ballots until Dec. 18. By that point, the state had already certified the election and the missing ballots couldn’t have counted.

‘She worked her ass off’ — on the cookies

Jacobs said before the vote that she was surprised by Witzel-Behl’s “complete lack of action” during the relevant time period. Marge Bostelmann, a Republican appointee on the commission and the former longtime Green Lake County clerk, said that even if she had been on vacation in such a situation as a county clerk, she would have remained accessible if urgent questions arose.

Commissioner Bob Spindell, a Republican, was the lone dissenter on the vote to approve the report, saying he didn’t want Witzel-Behl to be “crucified.”

One person close to the Madison Clerk’s Office, who requested anonymity to speak candidly, told Votebeat that the task of making thousands of cookies and arranging deliveries “became all-consuming” for Witzel-Behl. “You could see how she was not focused on getting through reconciliation or whatever.”

“For some people, baking is calming,” that person continued. “It seemed like she needed a break. But then she worked her ass off (on the cookies). It was a huge operation.” 

Between early and mid-December, city employees from a variety of departments thanked Witzel-Behl for her cookies. It’s not clear how many cookies she ultimately made.

On Dec. 16, one person in the city’s transportation department sent a clerk’s office staffer an email asking, “Are these cookies for the entire first floor? The entire building? The entire universe?”

Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Shur at ashur@votebeat.org.

Votebeat is a nonprofit news organization reporting on voting access and election administration across the U.S. Sign up for Votebeat Wisconsin’s free newsletter here.

Madison clerk was on a cookie-baking staycation as missing-ballot mess unfolded is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 4 minutes

Former Madison Clerk Maribeth Witzel-Behl violated multiple state laws when her office failed to count nearly 200 absentee ballots in the 2024 presidential election, according to a draft report released Wednesday by the Wisconsin Elections Commission. 

The commission cited a lack of leadership in the clerk’s office, referring both to Witzel-Behl and the deputy clerk who assumed control during her vacation shortly after the election.

Witzel-Behl, who was put on leave by the city after the error and then resigned, broke state law by failing to supervise absentee ballot handling, neglecting post-election processes, and by not training poll workers to check the bags used to transport ballots, the commission concluded.

“There is no evidence that the City Clerk took any steps to investigate the uncounted ballots once they were brought to her attention,” the commission wrote. “The evidence demonstrates that the City Clerk began her vacation on November 13 and then had little to do with the supervision of her office until almost a month later.”

The draft report follows a months-long investigation into the 193 ballots that went missing on Election Day. The ballots were found over the next several weeks — some of them before final certification of results — but were never counted. Commission Chair Ann Jacobs, a Democrat, jointly led the investigation alongside Republican commissioner and former Chair Don Millis.

For months, Madison election officials have been saying that the ballots that went uncounted were delivered to two polling sites but weren’t unopened. But the commission found no evidence the ballot bags were ever delivered. A chief inspector at one site testified he was confident there was no unopened bag in the supply cart sent to his ward.

The errors have already prompted significant changes in Madison’s election processes. Officials have overhauled ballot tracking procedures, which Madison and Dane County leaders say should prevent a repeat of the 2024 mistake.

Still, the commission emphasized “it is essential that the public understands what has occurred, so that municipalities throughout the state can review their own processes and make certain that they too do not find themselves in this very unfortunate situation.”

The commission’s sharp criticism extended beyond Witzel-Behl, noting that “the staff of the City Clerk’s office failed to take any action regarding those ballots.”

Deputy Clerk Jim Verbick said that his post-election involvement was “minimal” and that he didn’t think it was his job to do anything about the missing ballots, the commission’s findings state.

“However, he did not attempt to speak to the City Clerk about the matter,” the review continues. “There was nobody who took responsibility for these ballots. It was always someone else’s job.”

Madison Interim Clerk Mike Haas said in a statement that the city is reviewing WEC’s report and that he hopes that it can provide lessons that prevent similar errors in the future. He did not respond to a request for further comment.

Former clerk violated laws, gave contradictory statements

The report focused on lapses in training by the clerk’s office. For example, it said, Witzel-Behl stored absentee ballots in green courier bags, but didn’t mention that in poll worker training, and the bags weren’t labeled as carrying absentee ballots. She also failed to train poll workers that absentee ballots could also be stored in red security carts, which the commission said contributed to the ballots going uncounted. That lack of training broke state law, the commission stated.

The commission also found that Witzel-Behl violated a law requiring her to supervise absentee ballot handling. In her deposition, she “could not answer basic questions about absentee ballot handling procedures in her office.”

The commission’s report highlights contradictions between Witzel-Behl’s actions in office and deposition testimony. Although she claimed not to know about the uncounted ballots until December, the commission said she messaged an election worker in late November with instructions on how to handle the first batch of uncounted ballots.

Upon learning of the missing ballots in November, the commission said, Witzel-Behl should have alerted the city attorney, the County Board of Canvassers and the commission and immediately investigated her office’s procedures — but she didn’t.

The commission also alleged she violated laws by printing pollbooks too early, failing to oversee poll workers and inadequately preparing for the city’s review of election results.

Draft findings include several orders for Madison compliance

The report lists draft recommendations that the commissioners will vote on at their July 17 meeting. These include requiring the Madison Clerk’s Office to create a plan detailing which employee oversees which task; printing pollbooks no earlier than the Thursday before each election; clearly labeling and tracking the bags carrying absentee ballots; checking all ballot bags and drop boxes before the city finalizes election results; and explaining how it’s going to comply with each of the orders.

Witzel-Behl’s office printed pollbooks for the two affected wards on Oct. 23 — nearly two weeks before Election Day — despite state guidance to print them as close to the election as possible.

Had they been printed later, absentee voters whose ballots had already been returned would have been marked automatically, alerting poll workers that those ballots were in hand but not yet counted. 

But printing pollbooks no earlier than the Thursday before an election could be challenging, said Claire Woodall, who was formerly Milwaukee’s top election official. Cities like Madison and Milwaukee must print tens of thousands of pollbook pages, often using private printers, and distribute them to chief inspectors.

“It seems like you’re rushing a process” with the Thursday requirement, Woodall said. “The last thing you want is for voters to show up at 7 a.m. and discover you don’t have the correct pollbook.”

Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Shur at ashur@votebeat.org.

Votebeat is a nonprofit news organization reporting on voting access and election administration across the U.S. Sign up for Votebeat Wisconsin’s free newsletter here.

Wisconsin Elections Commission alleges former Madison clerk broke laws is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.