Freedom of Information
In Robert A. Caro’s autobiography, Working, he shares a lesson: “Turn every page.” At the time, Caro was sifting through millions of files related to Lyndon B. Johnson. Since, the number of files declassified on topics from JFK to 9/11 to UFO/UAP are almost too many to read.
One of my Minnesota acquaintances who has educated me on regenerative farming has said that FOIA is one of the most powerful tools we currently have. I agree. Just focusing on election-related freedom of information requests, or what are sometimes called data requests or records requests in Minnesota, has left me with more avenues to explore than I can take on. “Turn every page,” is, like any advice, situational.
As Martin Geddes has noted in his research in the UK court system, “Money is a constraint. Time is a constraint. Expertise is a constraint. Emotional stamina is a constraint. Reopening a question — tracing a chain of authority, reconciling contradictory records, holding an institution to its own rules — requires resources most citizens simply do not have. So disputes often terminate early, not because the citizen is persuaded, but because they are exhausted…”
This reminded me of how it took former Michigan senator Patrick Colbeck several years and $2,500 just to force the government to give him public video of the election office where he was observing on November 3rd, 2020.
Minnesota Records Requests
The current election system does not immediately show the public that the rules are being followed. For just one example, consider that, while you are given an ‘I voted’ sticker, there is no confirmation that the computer tabulator that just took your ballot has 1) properly scanned a ballot image (essentially taking a picture of the ballot), or 2) interpreted the ovals you filled in accurately, or 3) saved the ballot image on the tabulator itself or any removable media (like a thumb drive). Neither can any of the election judges (poll workers) verify any of these three for you. Actually, there is currently no process existing that would demonstrate this to you. If the process cannot verify even one voter’s selections, how can it verify the aggregate?
Since the current system does not immediately show the work, FOIA is a useful tool to attempt to learn whether election process and rules have been followed. Instead of immediate gratification, which, I think, for elections, is a worthy aim, a voter who wants to learn about aspects of the election system is on balance made to wait quite a while. One must be patient. For instance, a simple request of the voter file (the voter rolls or voter histories) usually takes a matter of days to be delivered.
There are a number of areas one could look into, from any of the inputs (registration, ballots, vote counts) to the output (results) across the six phases (voter registration, absentee ballots, election day, election night, reporting, audits). For example, from an electronic process perspective, some Minnesotans wanted to know why modems (with network capability, and internet capability) were used in tabulators. One blocked records request in Rice County turned into a three-year court case that went on appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court, relating to non-certified modems in tabulators.
Prior to that, in 2020, one postelection review was missing ballots (about 800) and had ordered and had received delivery of a Dominion printer on the day of the postelection review. As this is not my story, but rather one for Dakota County and those in attendance, I will not go into details. One wonders how more information about this could have been requested officially and why not, for just one question, if ballots were missing, there needed to be a closed-door review three days later. If there were missing ballots, this should have triggered additional postelection reviews under § 206.89.
For my part, I participated in seeking cast vote records from all the counties. In 2022, if one wanted the ballot images or cast vote record reports (sometimes call ballot review reports for ES&S systems), one was promptly turned away, even though these are essential components of an audit of the computer tabulators themselves—if there are no ballot images, from which the tabulator immediatly interprets the ovals to add to its running tallies, then there is actually no proof at all that the computer scanners even performed to their most basic function, which is to tabulate votes.
Only one county (Fillmore) managed to produce its cast vote record report for the 2020 general election. Only one county (Chisago) did the same for the 2022 primary election, although this was done after it was admitted the county had committed (perhaps unknowingly) a federal violation by allowing their vendor, Hart Intercivic to, during a software update, archive the 2020 election in advance of the 22-month data retention period.
For emphasis: To my knowledge, no ballot images have ever been reviewed by a county auditor, much less shared with the public. In 2023, ballot images were made non-public (classified) data by the Minnesota Legislature.
Before going step by step through the Minnesota election system, I’d like to share by way of an example what it takes to gather data, records, and general information relating to the system through the normal records request process.
It is true that most government data and records and work product are public (unless classified); however, it still requires money, time, expertise, and emotional stamina.
For instance, in the story that follows, I was first told no, and then asked to re-open the same request. Ignoring those two options, which would have delayed the process unnecessarily, I opted to ask again for the same information—and was eventually given a six-page email, the first three of which were completely redacted (blacked out). Because I do not know the exact content of those first three pages (as it is redacted), I cannot know whether the redacting decision was correct or not in terms of the Chapter 13 Data Practices statutes. (So, there’s two lessons: 1) how to ask and keep asking; and 2) a reckoning with uncertainty as relating to sometimes potentially key data or information.)
The Hennepin County Electronic Poll Pad Pilot Documentation
In 2025 I published a pamphlet titled Simon’s Sensors: The Secret of the iPads, which includes an expanded version of this story.
At its core, after thinking about the rollout of electronic rosters (iPads with embedded software from KNOWiNK), which began in 2016, to well over half of Minnesota’s counties (and many of the municipalities within those counties), I aimed to learn more about the current status of the technology.
In reviewing contracts that my home county, Hennepin County, had with the vendor, KNOWiNK, I discovered that a new pilot program had been run in 2024. At the start, I didn’t know that for sure, all I had was a proposal for a pilot program with costs, about $27,000, for a list of items, including ballot printers.
Any election judge (poll worker) in Minnesota will be able to tell you that the current iPads cannot print ballots. But what if they could by adding a ballot printer? It seemed that KNOWiNK was already or soon to be providing this capability, if indeed what I was gathering from the proposal was accurate.
I used data requests through the Hennepin County data portal as well as direct emails to members of the roughly 30-person election staff for Hennepin County.
Finally, after some months, it was confirmed that a pilot was run. However, since the pilot was “not completed”, it had been decided that no further information about its success or failure would be shared. Were these ballot printers even used? How many were used? (The proposal quoted five, but that was only a proposal.) If they were, where were they used? How many ballots were printed? Were any of the printed ballots cast by voters?
I am still debating whether I should like to take further action on this, including filing suit, to force this information to be disclosed. It could be said that I was temporarily exhausted. And so, the public only learned, through my writing on same in Simon’s Sensors: The Secret of the iPads, that there remains uncertainty about the pilot and the reasons for it, including the reasons that it was not highlighted by either the county or the Office of the Secretary of State as something to look forward to.
I doubt many residents of Hennepin County were aware that ballot printers may have been used on-site in polling locations, attached to the iPads (or somehow networked to them) to enable ballots to be printed. I further doubt that many Hennepin County residents are aware that in 2024 Hennepin County violated the law for about 40 days of the 46-day absentee ballot period by not providing balanced absentee ballot boards. About 200,000 absentee ballots were processed during that period for the general election of November 5, 2024. The court offered no remedy apart from requiring Hennepin County to use balanced absentee ballot boards for the remaining few days of the absentee election timeframe. As far as I know, no one lost their job. More importantly, none of the approximately 200,000 ballots processed in violation of state statute were re-examined.
Is such a flagrant violation of the law in Hennepin County (relating to absentee ballot processing) relevant for my inquiry into the electronic poll pad ballot printers?
Amendments to Chapter 13?
What would it take to strike the amendment to § 13… which made ballot images non-public (classified)?
Even in the interim, as that could take years for the Legislature to change back to how it was, citizens can be asking their election staff and auditors if they are reviewing 1) the ballot images, 2) the cast vote records, and 3) the posted unoffical results, in addition to any post-election reviews that are run. There is not yet any law preventing city or county-level auditors (whether elected or appointed) from cross-checking these basic data points. Seeing as around 90% (or more) of electronic tabulators are never tested, and the election reporting software itself is also not required to be tested, the check of ballot images, cast vote records, and reported results (for at least one down ballot race), seems like a fair ask.
Also, can’t request whether someone has accessed certain systems… see
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/13
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/13.15
Some more FOIA ideas…
See § 201.12 PROPER REGISTRATION, VERIFICATION BY MAIL; CHALLENGES. Notice that in Subdivision 2, 3, and 4, for voters who have moved within the state, moved out of state, and those who are challenged, are all set to ‘inactive’ within the statewide voter registration system (SVRS). It would be interesting to request a list of voters whose status has changed from ‘active’ to ‘inactive’ and back to ‘active’ again for for the ‘moved out of state’ reason, to see how many times such people have voted in recent elections. Who is the responsible authority to receive such a data request?
Look at § 203B.12 ABSENTEE VOTER NAMES. In Subd. 8. Names of persons; accepted absentee ballots., it reads in part, “For all elections where use of the statewide voter registration system is required, the secretary of state must maintain lists of voters who have submitted absentee ballots that have been accepted, separated by method of ballot delivery.” Background note: Historically, this list has not been issued to the public during the immediate three days before and after an election. What allowed the secretary of state to withhold disclosure during that pivotal election timeframe? What happens if this list is requested to be delivered to you daily for upcoming elections?
Within a town, city, or even county level - Number of EDR (election day registrations) by precinct (that occurred IN-PERSON vs by Absentee Ballot Application <– WILD)
Cast vote records… (since 2022, and even in 2025?, Hennepin County, receive ‘no responsive data’ lol)
Difficult to turn every page if given WAY too many pages or if pages are heavily redacted OR the relevant information actually withheld for long periods.
analogies/metaphors to chess/Go/Diplomacy - as seen on my substack comment here:
also
https://substack.com/@patelpatriot/note/c-205189493
https://substack.com/@patelpatriot/note/c-207268462
what are effective dates of SAVE act? - why would politicians save us? vs save themselves?
Instead of immediate gratification, which, I think, for elections, is a worthy aim, a voter who wants to learn about aspects of the Election System is on balance made to wait quite a while.
(^ Expand on what is meant here…)
below is not MY story, so someone else should tell it - though i have seen pictures … should have resulted in another set of postelection reviews in additional precincts, according to the rules laid out in Minnesota Statute § 206.89.
^
(ANDY LOKKEN, precinct 4950, didn’t have ballots, had ordered dominion printers, did a closed-door review 3 days later and came up with the ballots?, or at least submitted to SOS that they did… never verified by any observers or participants.)
More recent inquiries into new developments in computer technology have taken even longer for public access. (PUT STORY OF THE BALLOT PRINTERS KNOWINK NOW)
Riff on this using EXAMPLE FROM SIMON SENSORS w/ Electronic Poll Pads:
https://newsletter.martingeddes.com/p/the-mother-of-all-ai-audits
“
AI changes the economics of attribution
Modern democracies already give citizens formal tools: freedom of information laws, complaint mechanisms, judicial review, consultation processes, public records. In theory, the architecture of accountability exists.
In practice, those tools are costly to use.
Money is a constraint. Time is a constraint. Expertise is a constraint. Emotional stamina is a constraint. Reopening a question — tracing a chain of authority, reconciling contradictory records, holding an institution to its own rules — requires resources most citizens simply do not have.
So disputes often terminate early, not because the citizen is persuaded, but because they are exhausted.
“
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/13
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/13.15
https://zarkfiles.substack.com/p/a-tiny-texas-addition consider <– algo’s running in voter rolls … could it be from ERIC - electronic registration information center?
https://www.sos.mn.gov/election-administration-campaigns/election-administration/election-laws/