John S. Anderson, a McMinnville resident and U.S. Navy veteran, used public comment time on Oct. 30 to raise concerns about ballot‑return envelope secrecy and chain‑of‑custody under Oregon law ahead of the Nov. 4 election.

Anderson said he had posted video evidence and sent emails to county and state officials showing what he described as envelopes that fail confidentiality standards. He cited Oregon statutes (ORS 254.470 and ORS 206.010) and asked the county to identify who certified envelope security, who audited handling and whether local custody practices comply with state law. He said the Secretary of State’s office dismissed his concerns as a drop‑box issue and that he was frustrated by limited responses from law enforcement when he tried to deliver evidence.

Why it matters
Anderson framed his comments as a request for county inquiry to preserve confidence in the mail‑ballot system. County clerks and election administrators are charged by Oregon statute with ensuring secrecy and custody of ballots; Anderson asked commissioners to clarify roles and whether local practices meet statutory standards.

Quoted
"ORS 254.470 demands secrecy. And I have to ask, where is the answer to secret here? I'm left wondering, have we abandoned our duty?" Anderson said.

What commissioners and staff may do next
No formal county action on Anderson’s statements was recorded in the meeting; his comments were entered into the public record. County election staff or the county clerk would be the appropriate offices to respond to specific statutory compliance questions; Anderson said he may pursue additional legal remedies.