MINUTES

                              City of Charlottesville Electoral Board
                                  Meeting of November 2-5, 2021

The meeting was called to order by the Chair at 8:35 p.m. on Tuesday, November 2, in
the office of the Charlottesville General Registrar. Those present for all, or a portion, of
this meeting were Electoral Board members Jon Bright (Chair), Anne Hemenway (Vice
Chair), and Jim Nix (Secretary), Acting Director of Elections and General Registrar
Taylor Yowell, Assistant Registrar Laurel Isatchenko, Voter Equipment Technician Bob
Hodous, Voter Registration Manager Jamie Virostko and Charlottesville Clerk of Court,
Llezelle Dugger. This meeting was convened for the purpose of compiling the results of
the November 2 General Election and completing necessary follow-up actions including
the canvass of the election to establish the official results, the review of provisional
ballots, and the count of provisional ballots approved by the Electoral Board. There was
no formal agenda for this meeting.

Public Comment

No members of the public were present for the November 2 session of this meeting.
Mr. Tom McCrystal, representing the Charlottesville Republican Committee and Mr.
Isaac Hadam representing the Youngkin campaign were present during the sessions on
November 3 and 5. Ms. Bekah Saxon representing the Charlottesville Democratic
Committee was present for the November 3 session. They did not make any comment
at the start of the session but asked occasional questions during the meeting.

Reporting of Election Results

Beginning shortly after the polls closed at 7:00 p.m. on November 2, several members
of the staff recorded election results received by telephone from officers of election at
the nine city precincts. The election results were recorded in the office on worksheets
provided by the registrar. A copy of each worksheet was then made and posted in the
office vestibule for public inspection. The registrar entered the turnout figures and tally
of each precinct’s results into the State’s election reporting system from the call-in
sheets.

Beginning at approximately 8:45 p.m., the Chief Election Officers from each precinct
arrived to turn in election documentation along with the digital memory devices on which
the election results and voter turnout data had been recorded.

The meeting was suspended at 10:30 pm and was resumed at 9:10 a.m. on
Wednesday, November 3, 2021, in the office of the Charlottesville General Registrar for
the purpose of conducting a canvass of the election.

Minutes, November 2-5, 2021                                                        Page |1
Canvass of the Election

During the canvass of each precinct, the Statement of Results (SOR) forms were
examined to verify that the number of voters reported as checked in and the number of
ballots scanned matched the totals on the tapes from the poll books and ballot
scanners. The SORs were also examined to verify that the number of ballots scanned
was consistent with the number of voters checked in. And lastly, the numbers recorded
in VERIS on election night were reviewed for accuracy by comparing them with the
numbers on the scanner tapes.

The canvass was briefly interrupted at 11:00 a.m. to provide an opportunity for
provisional voters to address the Board concerning the status of their ballots but, when
no provisional voters were found to be present, the canvass was resumed.

The canvass of the nine voting precincts found just one discrepancy, a four-vote
undercount for one school board candidate, requiring a change to the unofficial election
night vote tallies reported in VERIS. In two precincts the number of ballots scanned
exceeded the number of voters checked in. The discrepancy was by a single voter in
one precinct and two in another. In both cases the Board members agreed that the
likely cause was a failure to fully check in voters, possibly curb-side voters or users of
the Touch Writer ballot marking device. To prevent this recurring problem, precinct
chiefs had been instructed to keep a log of curb-side voters, however, this measure was
not employed in the two precincts in which the errors occurred.

The canvass of the central absentee precinct was initiated but could not be completed
until after the noon Friday deadline for late arriving ballots by mail.

The meeting was suspended at 3:00 p.m.

Provisional Ballot Meeting

The Board reconvened at 11:25 a.m. on Friday, November 5, 2021, in the office of the
Charlottesville General Registrar to determine the validity of provisional ballots and to
conduct a canvass of the Central Absentee Precinct. To start Ms. Yowell conducted a
swearing in of the three Electoral Board members as Election Officials for the
Provisional Ballot Precinct.

On a motion by the Secretary, seconded by the Vice Chair, the Electoral Board
voted (Ayes: Jon Bright, Anne Hemenway and Jim Nix; Noes: None; Absent: None) to
meet in closed session as authorized by Va. Code sec. 2.2-3712, specifically:



Minutes, November 2-5, 2021                                                       Page |2
        Virginia Code Section 24.2-653 for the determination of the validity of
        provisional ballots

Acting General Registrar Taylor Yowell and Mr. Tom McCrystal, representing the
Charlottesville Republican Committee, were permitted to remain present for this closed
meeting. As each ballot was considered, Ms. Yowell presented the results of research
conducted into the status of each provisional ballot along with recommendations for
action by the board.

On motion by the Secretary, seconded by the Vice Chair, the Electoral Board
certified by the following vote (Ayes: Jon Bright, Anne Hemenway and Jim Nix; Noes:
None; Absent: None) that to the best of each Board member’s knowledge only
public business matters lawfully exempted from the open meeting requirements
of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act and identified in the Motion convening
the closed session were heard, discussed or considered in the closed session.

Actions Taken on Provisional Ballots

Upon completion of the review and a return to open session the Board conducted a
series of votes to implement the decisions made in the closed session. Provisional
voters constitute a separate precinct and the results from provisional ballots are
reported separately from those of the nine regular precincts and the central absentee
precinct. Nevertheless, although they are tallied together it has proven advantageous to
review and evaluate the provisional ballots in batches based on the voting precincts
from which they originated.

Two provisional ballots were cast by voters in the Central Absentee Precinct. Both
voters were found not to be registered to vote in Charlottesville and these ballots were
recommended by Ms. Yowell for rejection. By a unanimous vote on a motion by the
Secretary, seconded by the Vice Chair, these ballots were rejected.

Of the six provisional ballots cast by voters in the Key Recreation Precinct five were
cast by voters who had requested absentee ballots by mail but did not bring them to the
polls. Since no absentee ballots had been received from these voters Ms. Yowell
recommended their approval. The sixth provisional ballot was also cast by a voter who
had requested an absentee ballot by mail. However, since that ballot had been
received and counted before the deadline, Ms. Yowell recommended that this
provisional ballot be denied. By a unanimous vote on a motion by the Secretary,
seconded by the Vice Chair, five provisional ballots in this precinct were approved to be
counted and one rejected.

Of the ten provisional ballots cast by voters in the Clark Precinct six were cast by
voters who had requested absentee ballots by mail but did not bring them to the polls.

Minutes, November 2-5, 2021                                                      Page |3
Since no absentee ballots had been received from these voters Ms. Yowell
recommended approval. Four provisional ballots were cast by voters who were found
not to be registered to vote in Charlottesville and these ballots were recommended by
Ms. Yowell for rejection. By a unanimous vote on a motion by the Secretary, seconded
by the Vice Chair six provisional ballots in this precinct were approved to be counted
and four rejected.

Of the seven provisional ballots cast by voters in the Carver Precinct five were cast by
voters who had requested absentee ballots by mail but did not bring them to the polls.
Since no absentee ballots had been received from these voters Ms. Yowell
recommended approval. One provisional ballot had been cast by a voter who claimed
to have registered at the Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV). Since no evidence of such
a registration could be found, Ms. Yowell recommended rejection. One provisional
ballot was cast by a voter who was recorded in the pollbook as having already voted
and Ms. Yowell recommended rejection. By a unanimous vote on a motion by the
Secretary, seconded by the Vice Chair five provisional ballots in this precinct were
approved to be counted and two rejected.

Of the fourteen provisional ballots cast by voters in the Walker Precinct eleven were
cast by voters who had requested absentee ballots by mail but did not bring them to the
polls. Since no absentee ballots had been received from these voters Ms. Yowell
recommended their ballots be approved. Two provisional ballots were cast by voters
who had changed their registration to another jurisdiction at the DMV and were
recommended for rejection by Ms. Yowell. And one provisional ballot was cast by a
voter registered in Charlottesville but at another precinct and was recommended by Ms.
Yowell for rejection. By a unanimous vote on a motion by the Secretary, seconded by
the Vice Chair, eleven provisional ballots in this precinct were approved to be counted
and three rejected.

Of the ten provisional ballots cast by voters in the Tonsler Precinct five were cast by
voters who had requested absentee ballots by mail but did not bring them to the polls.
Since no absentee ballots had been received from these voters, Ms. Yowell
recommended that these ballots be approved. One provisional ballot was cast by a
voter due to an error by an election official and Ms. Yowell recommended approval.
Two provisional ballots had been cast by voters found not to be registered to vote in
Charlottesville and these ballots were recommended by Ms. Yowell for rejection. Two
other provisional ballots had been cast by voters who had attempted to register in
Charlottesville after the close of registration for this election and were recommended for
rejection by Ms. Yowell. By a unanimous vote on a motion by the Secretary, seconded
by the Vice Chair six provisional ballots in this precinct were approved to be counted
and four rejected.




Minutes, November 2-5, 2021                                                      Page |4
Of the thirteen provisional ballots cast by voters in the Johnson Precinct eleven were
cast by voters who had requested absentee ballots by mail but did not bring them to the
polls. Since no absentee ballots had been received from these voters Ms. Yowell
recommended that they be approved. Another provisional ballot was also cast by a
voter who had requested an absentee ballot by mail. However, since that ballot had
been received and counted before the deadline, Ms. Yowell recommended that this
provisional ballot be denied. One provisional ballot had been cast by a voter who had
attempted to register in Charlottesville after the close of registration for this election and
was recommended for rejection by Ms. Yowell. By a unanimous vote on a motion by
the Secretary, seconded by the Vice Chair eleven ballots in this precinct were approved
to be counted and two rejected.

Of the thirteen provisional ballots cast by voters in the Buford Precinct five were cast
by voters who had requested absentee ballots by mail but did not bring them to the
polls. Since no absentee ballots had been received from these voters Ms. Yowell
recommended that they be approved. One provisional ballot had been cast by a voter
whose registration had been transferred in error to another jurisdiction by the
Department of Elections and was recommended for approval by Ms. Yowell. Six
provisional ballots had been cast by voters found to be registered in other jurisdictions.
Several of these were likely due to voter confusion at the DMV website but all were
recommended for rejection by Ms. Yowell. And one provisional ballot had been cast by
a voter who had attempted to register in Charlottesville after the close of registration for
this election and was recommended for rejection by Ms. Yowell. By a unanimous vote
on a motion by the Secretary, seconded by the Vice Chair six provisional ballots in this
precinct were approved to be counted and seven were rejected.

Of the eighteen provisional ballots cast by voters in the Venable Precinct one was cast
by a voter who had requested an absentee ballot by mail but did not bring it to the polls.
Since no absentee ballot had been received from this voter Ms. Yowell recommended
that it be approved. Two provisional ballots had been cast by voters whose registration
had been changed to another jurisdiction because of errors by the DMV. Ms. Yowell
recommended approval of these ballots. One provisional ballot had been cast by a
voter whose registration was found to have been transferred to another jurisdiction by
the Department of Elections in error and it was recommended for approval by Ms.
Yowell. Ten provisional ballots were cast by voters found not to be registered to vote in
Charlottesville and these ballots were recommended by Ms. Yowell for rejection. And
four provisional ballots had been cast by voters who had attempted to register in
Charlottesville after the close of registration for this election and were recommended for
rejection by Ms. Yowell. By a unanimous vote on a motion by the Secretary, seconded
by the Vice Chair four provisional ballots in this precinct were approved to be counted
and fourteen were rejected.




Minutes, November 2-5, 2021                                                          Page |5
Of the eight provisional ballots cast by voters in Alumni Precinct five were cast by
voters who had requested absentee ballots by mail but did not bring them to the polls.
Since no absentee ballots had been received from these voters Ms Yowell
recommended their approval. Two provisional ballots were cast by voters found not to
be registered to vote in Charlottesville and these ballots were recommended by Ms.
Yowell for rejection. And one provisional ballot had been cast by a voter who had
attempted to register in Charlottesville after the close of registration for this election and
was recommended for rejection by Ms. Yowell. By a unanimous vote on a motion by
the Secretary, seconded by the Vice Chair five provisional ballots in this precinct were
approved to be counted and three were rejected.

In summary, of the 101 provisional ballots submitted, 59 were accepted and 42 rejected.
The approved ballots were then opened and counted by means of a ballot scanner. A
paper Provisional Precinct pollbook was prepared, along with an SOR, and the tally of
provisional ballots was entered into VERIS by the Acting General Registrar.

Canvass of Central Absentee Precinct (CAP)

The Board members and the Acting General Registrar completed the canvass of the
central absentee precinct initiated on Wednesday and confirmed that the tally of votes
entered into VERIS for CAP exactly matched the combined totals from the scanner
employed for in-person early voting, the printout from the scanner used for mailed
ballots received by election day, the printout from the scanner used for late arriving
mailed ballots and the hand count report for ballots that could not be read by scanner.
This concluded the canvass of the election.

Abstracts of the results of the election were printed, signed, and sealed by the Board
members.

The next meeting of the Board will take place in the office of the Charlottesville General
Registrar at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, November 9.

The meeting was adjourned at 6:30 p.m.

Respectfully submitted:



James Nix, Secretary



Jon Bright, Chair                                  Anne Hemenway, Vice Chair

Minutes, November 2-5, 2021                                                          Page |6