A recent complaint, filed with the Wisconsin Elections Commission (WEC), was filed by Chief Election Inspector Kenneth Wolfe against Bristol Village Clerk Renee Brickner. Notably, this is the second formal complaint filed against Brickner. The newest complaint details a series of alleged violations and mismanagement during the November 2024 General Election. Brickner’s response to the complaint, while attempting to address the allegations, has done little to quell concerns about her ability to administer elections effectively, and Chief Wolfe has since filed a response to her response. Adding to the controversy, Brickner’s decision to run for re-election as a Village Trustee in nearby Paddock Lake has raised questions about her capacity to manage both roles amidst ongoing election problems in Bristol.
The Complaint: Allegations of Mismanagement and Violations
Kenneth Wolfe’s complaint, filed on December 13, 2024, outlines numerous issues that plagued the November 2024 election in Bristol. Among the key allegations:
1. Delayed Poll Opening: Wolfe claims that Clerk Brickner failed to provide the necessary keys to open the First Christian Church polling location on time, resulting in a 35-minute delay. Additionally, Brickner allegedly did not have the keys or activation codes for the DS-200 voting machine, further delaying the start of voting.
2. Failure to Provide Critical Documents: Wolfe alleges that Brickner did not provide the Ineligible Voter List and Absentee Ballot Log until nearly 11:00 AM, hours after the polls opened. This delay caused confusion and hindered the processing of absentee ballots, which were processed until approximately 2:00 am the next day. Wolfe also alleges that Brickner incorrectly told him there were no write-in candidates for the election. Wolfe says he finally called Kenosha County Clerk Regi Waligora around 11:30 am on election day and she provided him with the correct list of seven candidates registered as write in candidates.
3. Mishandling of Absentee Ballots: Wolfe asserts that Brickner failed to alphabetize or separate absentee ballots by ward, leading to significant delays in processing. Additionally, poll workers were forced to manually open 998 absentee ballot envelopes without letter openers, causing unnecessary strain.
4. Incorrect Ballots Mailed: Perhaps the most egregious error was that approximately 40 voters reportedly received ballots for the wrong ward, requiring poll workers to remake the ballots on Election Day.
5. Lack of Proper Supplies: Wolfe claims that Brickner failed to provide the correct size ballots for the ES&S ExpressVote machine, as well as properly marked envelopes for spoiled and remade ballots.
6. Unsecured Election Materials: During the post-election reconciliation process, Wolfe alleges that sensitive election materials, including the DS-200 machine, were left unsecured in a public area, raising serious security concerns.
Wolfe’s complaint concludes with a call for the Wisconsin Elections Commission to intervene and advise the Bristol Board of Trustees to remove Brickner from her position as Clerk, citing her inability to competently administer elections.
Brickner’s Response: Denials and Deflections
In her response, filed on February 6, 2025, Clerk Renee Brickner denies many of Wolfe’s allegations while admitting to some mistakes. Key points from her response include:
1. Delayed Poll Opening: Brickner admits to not having the key fob for the First Christian Church building on Election Day but denies that she failed to provide the necessary activation codes for the DS-200 machine. She claims that the delay was due to technical issues with the DS-200 at the Village Hall polling location, which caused her to arrive later than planned.
2. Ineligible Voter List and Absentee Ballot Log: Brickner denies that these documents were not provided on time, stating that additional copies were delivered to Wolfe between 10:30 AM and 11:00 AM. She also denies that absentee ballots were not separated by ward, claiming that they were properly sorted and delivered to the correct polling locations.
3. Incorrect Ballots Mailed: Brickner admits that some voters received ballots for the wrong ward but disputes the number, stating that only 18 ballots had to be remade due to incorrect ward information. She attributes this to technical issues with the WisVote system during in-person absentee voting.
4. Unsecured Election Materials: Brickner denies Wolfe’s characterization of the reconciliation process, stating that election materials were secured and that the DS-200 machine was left unlocked due to a damaged lock. She also disputes Wolfe’s claim that the reconciliation took 3.5 hours, stating that it was completed in 2.5 hours.
Despite her attempts to address the allegations, Brickner’s response has been met with skepticism. Critics argue that her admissions of mistakes, combined with her deflection of responsibility, underscore her inability to manage the complexities of election administration.
5. Failure to Notify Election Inspectors of Write-In Candidates: Brickner affirmed Wolfe’s allegation stating “ …I am ashamed and regret that I overlooked somethong of important as Write-In Candiates..” [sic]. She offered thanks to the county clerk for discovering her error (not Wolfe).
Wolfe’s Rebuttal to Brickner’s Response: Reaffirming Complaints and Pointing out Discrepancies
Chief Election Inspector Kenneth Wolfe responded to Clerk Renee Brickner’s February 6, 2025, response, reaffirming his initial allegations and highlighting discrepancies in Brickner’s account of events. His rebuttal systematically challenges Brickner’s denials, further casting doubt on her ability to administer elections effectively.
- Delayed Poll Opening and DS-200 Machine Issues
Wolfe counters Brickner’s claim that it was her responsibility to program the DS-200 voting machines on Election Day, stating that standard procedure dictates that the machines arrive at polling locations pre-programmed, with election inspectors provided with the necessary keys in advance. He points out that relying on the clerk to program multiple machines across different polling sites on Election Day is not a feasible approach. Moreover, Wolfe emphasizes that the delay was exacerbated because Brickner failed to bring the key fob necessary to access the polling location, preventing inspectors from setting up in a timely manner. - Failure to Provide Critical Election Documents
While Brickner asserts that she provided the Ineligible Voter List and Absentee Ballot Log on time, Wolfe refutes this, stating that neither he nor two other election inspectors could locate the lists in the provided materials. He maintains that these documents were missing from the election bins and were only received much later in the day, well after polls had opened, causing confusion and delays in processing absentee ballots. - DS-200 Key and Polling Site Access Issues
Wolfe rebuts Brickner’s claim that she did not personally leave to retrieve the DS-200 programming key, pointing out that regardless of whether she left or sent another election inspector, the fact remains that the necessary keys were left behind, further delaying the election process. He argues that Brickner’s insistence that programming the machines was solely her responsibility only underscores her failure to ensure that polling places were properly prepared before opening. - Issues with Election Inspectors and Absentee Ballot Processing
Wolfe highlights a concerning contradiction in Brickner’s response regarding the appointment of election inspectors. Brickner claimed that she had requested additional inspectors from the Republican Party of Kenosha County (RPKC) but did not receive the individuals she specifically wanted. Wolfe counters that, under Wisconsin Election Law, it is not the clerk’s role to dictate which individuals a party nominates and that Brickner had the authority to appoint unaffiliated inspectors if necessary, but she was required to prioritize the use of RPKC nominated individuals. - Concerns Over Repeated Mistakes and Election Security
While Brickner acknowledges making several errors, Wolfe argues that her repeated mistakes, lack of preparedness, and deflection of responsibility demonstrate a pattern of mismanagement. He further emphasizes that his concerns about her competency were expressed in his capacity as a village resident, not just as Chief Election Inspector.
Wolfe’s rebuttal strengthens the case against Clerk Brickner, reinforcing concerns over her ability to oversee elections in Bristol.
Mary Magdalen Moser’s Sworn Statement Provided in Wolfe Rebuttal
Moser provides additional support for Kenneth Wolfe’s claims in her statement, further questioning Clerk Renee Brickner’s handling of the November 2024 election. Moser, who was involved in the election reconcile process in Bristol, corroborates several of Wolfe’s allegations, emphasizing Brickner’s lack of preparedness and the resulting disruptions. Throughout her statement, Moser underscores Brickner’s overall mismanagement, describing an environment of confusion and inefficiency. She asserts that the mistakes made on Election Day were preventable and demonstrated a failure of leadership.
Concerns Over Bristol Clerk Brickner’s Re-Election Bid in Paddock Lake
As the Wisconsin Elections Commission reviews Wolfe’s complaint, Brickner’s response, and Wolfe’s rebuttal, the Village of Bristol faces a critical juncture. The outcome of this complaint, along with the results of Brickner’s re-election bid in Paddock Lake, will have significant implications for the future of both communities. For now, the residents of Bristol are left hoping for a resolution that restores their faith in the electoral process.
3 Responses
There is the legal way… correct and responsible way…. And then there is the Bristol way!!!
The Bristol clerk is not fit for the position she holds. This is not the first instance of her mismanagement of election materials or failure to adhere to procedural law in regards to elections. For the upcoming election of board members she failed to do the mandatory notice that election materials were available for those seeking to run. As a result the three incompetent board members, to include the village president are running unopposed. The village of Bristol is corrupt and has gotten away with egregious violations as a result of the political family ties the administrator, Randy Kerkman holds. The clerk needs to be removed as does the administrator who recommended and hired her. The board should be recalled as well. Time to get rid of the garbage that is making the village smell.
They should hire the clerk VoSL got rid of- she’s awesome (Hahn).