Paper Poll Books

If you're someone looking for hyperlocal action, here it is. Educate your city attorneys so they can properly advise the city council, or allow the city council to consider ignoring the poor advice they receive from their counsel. Any conversation toward using paper is beneficial, especially if city councils and town boards are beginning to think for themselves.

ELECTRONIC ROSTERS IN MINNESOTA: THE CASE FOR MUNICIPAL AUTONOMY

Background, Timeline, & the Legal Right to Choose Paper Poll Books (The Right Thing to Do)

THE CORE ISSUE

Despite bullying from Minnesota Office of the Secretary of State (MNOSS) led by Secretary Simon (MNSOS) and city/county attorney advice, Minnesota municipalities (cities and townships) retain the statutory right to decline electronic poll pads (KNOWiNK) and continue using or switch back to paper poll books. The flip begins with municipalities withdrawing their consent to use them.

TIMELINE OF THE ROLLOUT & RESISTANCE

• 2013 – The Blueprint: Legislature establishes the Electronic Roster Task Force.
• 2016 – The First Stand: Hennepin County attempts to roll out KNOWiNK iPads. Mayor Rick Weible and the St. Bonifacius City Council decline the contract after discovering security flaws (hacking the demo unit) and rejecting liability-shifting contract terms. Despite intense pressure and threats from Hennepin County staff, the city held firm and continued using paper. No penalties were ever levied.
• 2018 – Statewide Expansion: Following the initial pilot, rollout begins. By 2025, over 70 of 87 counties have deployed more than 7,000 internet-enabled KNOWiNK iPads.
• 2024 – The Ballot Printer Pilot: FOIA'd documents reveal Hennepin County ran a secret pilot program in 2024 to attach ballot printers to KNOWiNK iPads, enabling on-demand ballot printing at the precinct level. The county claims the pilot was "not completed," effectively hiding the capability from public scrutiny.
• September 2024 – Oak Grove Breaks the Chain: The City of Oak Grove (Anoka County) becomes the first municipality ever to formally cancel its leasing agreement with the county, reverting to paper poll books.
• October 2024 – The Intimidation Campaign: Days before the general election, the Anoka County Elections Department sent an unsigned letter to election judges threatening felony charges if they used paper poll books. The letter cited the MNSOS to claim counties have exclusive authority, a legal argument contradicted by Minnesota Statutes.
• 2025 – Renewal Pressure: As older iPads become obsolete, counties like Anoka are pushing for expensive replacements ($271k+ contracts). Despite this, cities like Ramsey (Anoka) have followed Oak Grove’s lead, cancelling agreements.

THE LEGAL ARGUMENT: MUNICIPAL CHOICE IS MANDATORY

The claim that counties can force municipalities to use electronic rosters is legally baseless under current Minnesota Statutes.

1. The Authority to Use is Permissive, Not Mandatory

Minn. Stat. § 201.225, Subd. 1:"A county, municipality, or school district may use electronic rosters..."

Fact: The statute grants permission to use the technology; it does not mandate it.

2. The Requirement for Municipal Consent

Minn. Stat. § 201.221, Subd. 4:"Delegation to a municipal official requires the approval of the governing body of the municipality."

Fact: For a county auditor to delegate the duty of using an electronic roster system to a city or town, the city council or township board must explicitly approve it.

3. The Conclusion A county auditor does not have the authority to mandate the use of electronic rosters by a municipality. If a city or town governing body does not approve the delegation, the county cannot force the technology upon them. The choice belongs to the local electorate and their elected officials.

WHY THIS MATTERS: THE RISKS OF ELECTRONIC ROSTERS

• Centralized Surveillance: Unlike paper, these devices are internet-connected (via cellular data), allowing real-time syncing of precinct-level voting data to state servers and third-party vendors (KNOWiNK).
• Security Vulnerabilities: As demonstrated by Mayor Weible in 2016, the devices can be breached. Contracts often explicitly disclaim warranties regarding "harmful code" or data accuracy.
• Lack of Auditability: Paper trails are physical and local. Electronic data flows are not easily auditable, proprietary, and difficult for the public to verify without vendor cooperation.
• The "Sensor" Threat: The combination of real-time data syncing and the emerging capability for on-demand ballot printing creates a mechanism for "precision cheating" at the precinct level, a risk that paper rosters eliminate entirely. (Bexar County, TX shows yet another vector.)

CALL TO ACTION

To City Councils, Township Boards, and County Commissioners: Do not be bullied by administrative pressure or vague threats of legal action. The law is on your side. Do the right thing.

1. Counties Decline to Purchase: Follow Isanti's lead; save money, use paper poll books.
2. Municipalities, Read the Statutes: Confirm that § 201.221 requires your specific approval.
3. Demand Autonomy: Assert your right to choose paper poll books, which are secure, auditable, and free from internet and network vulnerabilities.
4. Reject Coercion: Recognize that the "felony threat" is a tactic from the top-down system to suppress local control and oversight.

The people of Minnesota deserve elections that are free from the influence of NGOs and bad actors who have legally been given access to our election data and can change it without a trace.

Sources: Minnesota Statutes §§ 201.221, 201.225; "Simon's Sensors: The Secret of the iPads" (Erik van Mechelen, 2025); Hennepin County Contract A164895 Amendment 2; Anoka County Election Integrity Team (ACEIT) records—legal analysis by Robert Kirchner (see video below).

VIDEO BACKGROUND AND HIGH LEVEL SUMMARY OF RELEVANT STATUTORY LANGUAGE FOR ELECTRONIC POLL PADS