Time sensitive/Help needed: Wisconsin Post-Election Audit Review

Hey friends, 

Tomorrow morning I am getting the opportunity to provide a public comment to the Wisconsin Elections Commission. This is their quarterly meeting, and one of the topics is the result of their post-election audit. The post-election audit results came out squeaky clean and made many headlines. 

I plan to discuss two main, connected ideas: the lack of representation of the City of Milwaukee in the post-election audit and the 13 tabulators that were found with their seals broken and doors open in Milwaukee County. 

Please see my past post for relevant links and details: https://www.reddit.com/r/wisconsin/comments/1j3hisn/election_audits_sampling_does_milwaukee_get/

I want my argument and logic to be clean, concise, and based on hard evidence. That is where I could use some help in preparing my thoughts this evening in advance of tomorrow. 

If you want to help - look over the audit report. Information for how to access the report is at the bottom of my post. Here are some ideas that I specifically need extra eyes on, but I’ll take any insights. 

  • Per page 52, The WEC approves their sample size and procedures. Can we trace where these ideas come from through past meeting notes of the WEC?
  • Anything suspicious on the pages from 54 to 55? 
  • Page 65 - These are the approved recommendations. 
    • Review the language closely from #1 and all sub-letters
    • What does #10 mean in the context of Milwaukee County? Did they do a county-level audit. 
    • What does #12 even mean in the context of Milwaukee County? These were certainly central count tabulators - so were the protocols followed? 
  • This audit looked at 373 reporting units and 336 municipalities. How many total reporting units/municipalities are in Wisconsin? 

What I need the most help with is linking the tabulators from the election day story in Milwaukee County to what is featured in the audit report - ES&S 850. Are these the machines that were covered in the election day story?

Truthfully, I don’t expect the WEC to provide any meaningful response. However, I think getting this information into public record and maybe picked up by a larger outlet is important. I stressed this in my earlier post, but I’ll stress it again here. This is a pattern of the audits not representing the population that voted in Pennsylvania, Arizona, Nevada, and North Carolina. 

Link for the post-election audit report: https://elections.wi.gov/event/commission-meeting-march-7-2025
The file you want is: OPEN Session Materials - March 7_FINAL for Web Posting.pdf

I appreciate any and all help! I know some people have been working on separate threads related to this and I apologize if I haven’t replied, but I am seeing the information!