April 8, 2026 · 10:00 AM

Board of Muncipal Canvassers

Minutes Agenda City Website ↗

The Board of Canvassers certified the election results based on the clerk’s original returns, naming the top vote-getters for the listed offices. The document provided is a state form (EL-106) with handwritten entries, and some key details are hard to read from the copy provided.

Key Decisions

Canvassers certified the tabular and summary vote statements as “correct and true” based on the original returns submitted to the Municipal Clerk—this is the official step that makes results final at the city level.

The form lists the highest and second-highest vote-getters for at least one contest (appears to be a council seat), but the scan’s handwriting is partially illegible—residents should expect the city to publish a clean, readable results summary alongside the certification.

A separate summary statement page reports a total votes-cast number, but the office label and several candidate names are difficult to decipher from the provided text, limiting public verification from this copy alone.

Public Input

No public comments or communications recorded for this meeting.

Agenda Items
Certification of the Board of Canvassers (EL-106)
The Board of Canvassers certified that the attached vote tabulation and the summary statement were accurate as compiled from the original returns made to the Municipal Clerk. The form also identifies the candidates with the highest (and next-highest, where applicable) vote totals for the listed office(s). The stakes here are basic but important: certification is the city’s official sign-off on election results, and the partially illegible handwritten copy provided makes it harder for residents to independently confirm what was certified.
📄 See in official document: Page 1
Summary Statement of the Board of Canvassers (EL-106)
The summary statement page reports the total number of votes cast for the referenced contest and lists candidates with their vote totals. However, the office name and multiple candidate entries are not clearly readable in the provided text, which undercuts transparency for a document that’s supposed to be the plain record of the outcome. If the city wants residents to trust the process, it should publish a clean, typed results table (or a clearer scan) that matches this certification.
📄 See in official document: Page 2
← Back to Meetings