Navigation
Topics
Log In
Log Out
:
Special Search
New Today
New This Week
Advanced Search
Tree View
Your Account
Edit Profile
Register
Forgot Password
Tools
Help/Instructions
Policies
CLICK STATE TO SEE:
"WATCH LIST"
Marked with: 
"OPEN & HONEST"
Marked with: 
...
|
| Can ROV be removed for incompetence? |
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Mark E. Smith
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Folkie
Post Number: 3
Registered: 08-2005
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, April 29, 2006 - 11:28 am: | 
|
Can an elections official be removed for incompetence?
In San Diego the ROV's office set up an area where the public could view the vote tally on the GEMS central tabulator screen through glass, but in the next to last election, as we all know, he was unable to position the screen so that it could be seen by the public, and Jim March was arrested to attempting to see the screen.
In the last election here the ROV allowed the political parties to name official observers to watch the vote tally, however he was unable to notify the parties or their observers when the bulk of the votes were being counted.
Does he have a fiduciary duty to ensure that the vote tallying is open to the public, and if so, can we get him fired for incompetence?
Another little detail is that he phoned the then head of the Green Party and had me removed as an official observer because I'm not a computer expert or engineer, but failed to notice that one of the Democratic Party's observers wasn't either. |
Pat Vesely
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Pat_vesely
Post Number: 256
Registered: 02-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, April 29, 2006 - 11:50 am: |
|
Hi Mark, welcome to Black Box Voting.org. I would think that if you can prove that you were discriminated against via "unequal treatment" by the ROV, perhaps the Green Party could attempt to bring a civil suit against the county and the ROV. I'm not an attorney but it would seem logical.
I would also check the California Elections Code to see if the ROV had any legal basis for making that decision.
Perhaps someone else here has some more advice.
Pat A. Vesely ;-) |
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 119
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, April 29, 2006 - 12:14 pm: |
|
Mark,
Everything I EVER say about election law here comes with the disclaimer that I am not a lawyer, and my experience is almost exclusively with Pennsylvania election law.
But many principles cross state lines.
One is to carefully separate primaries from November elections. A "minor political party" such as the Greens, would have no standing to observe anything in a Primary election in my state, because the Green party doesn't have primaries.
If we are talking a November election, most localities endeavor to have as large a public viewing area as possible, but some have almost no room. The Green party is as entitled to view everything as any other party, assuming they have at least one candidate on the ballot. I know of no state that has a rule requiring any observer to have any particular level of expertise. They are there no protect their partisan interests, not to debug software.
Again, the disclaimer. Election laws vary widely. Pat is right on the button. Check the code above. And do yourself a favor. When dealing in elections, think STATE law. The federal government arguably has a very little role in elections, even federal ones. And the argument can be made that even the little influence they do have could be constitutionally problematic, if push came to shove with this Supreme Court. |
Mark E. Smith
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Folkie
Post Number: 4
Registered: 08-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, April 29, 2006 - 12:17 pm: |
|
Oh yeah, off topic, but last night with nothing better to do, I created a petition to the head of the AEC.
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/889772142
So far it only has 10 signatures. It has some typos (it was past my bedtime when I noticed their email inviting people to try out their new petition-making stuff), but I think the message is clear enough. It just asks the head of the EAC to stop ramming voting machine systems that don't meet HAVA requirements down the throats of the states.
And in about an hour I'm heading over to the public library to show the DVD "Invisible Ballots" which features our very own Bev Harris.
So, as you can see, this is just how my mind is working today. (Actually most days, but today even more so.) |
Mark E. Smith
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Folkie
Post Number: 5
Registered: 08-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, April 29, 2006 - 12:38 pm: |
|
Okay, look at it this way. Under the Brown Act in California, all government meetings (with certain exceptions having to do with legal stuff and privacy) must be open to the public and noticed in advance.
So if we got a new City Clerk who set up a City Council meeting in such a way that the public was unable to attend or see what was going on, and then had somebody arrested for trying to see what was going on, I believe that Clerk would be fired for incompetence.
But say they weren't, after all they're new, and have some excuses, etc. So the next time, instead of making the meeting open to the public, they allow the public to appoint official meeting observers, but fail to post public notice of the meeting in advance or notify the observers, so that once again the meeting wasn't open.
I know for a fact that Clerk would be fired for incompetency. And I don't see why the same standards shouldn't apply to a ROV. |
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 120
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, April 29, 2006 - 12:47 pm: |
|
Mark,
Space often makes impossible everyone having intimate access to counting areas. Stakeholders must be included, and the public at large should be accomodated as space allows.
But please understand that accomodating hundreds of observers without advance notice will ALWAYS be a problem.
This is what I meant on another thread. Be part of the solution, not the problem. If you know that lots of folks are going to want to see the tallying, notify the ROV well in advance that they may need more public viewing area than they are used to providing. You will be treated as a hero by the ROV, and not as a PITA.
All ROV's or E.D.'s want is to be treated with a liitle common human courtesy. Attempt to provide them that, and you'll have a friend for life. |
Mark E. Smith
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Folkie
Post Number: 6
Registered: 08-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, April 29, 2006 - 3:48 pm: |
|
Kurt, ask Jim March, who was arrested for attempting to watch the GEMS central tabulator screen here -- there weren't hundreds of people, not even a large crowd, but the screen wasn't viewable from the public area even to a single person.
Due to the ensuing fuss about that incident, the ROV was well aware that people were concerned about viewing the tallying process, which is why he notified the political parties that they could appoint official observers. His failure to notify the parties or the observers when he counted the bulk of the votes was not because he didn't know they were interested.
I think that we, the voters, should also be treated with a little common human courtesy by the ROVs. Particularly when it comes to something they are required by law to do and have not done for two elections in a row.
We have another election coming up on June 6th, and I doubt if there will be any provisions made then either, but even if there are, permitting people to watch a computer screen does not let them observe the tallying process which is going on inside the machine and is totally hidden from view. A knowledgeable person can program a computer to say, "Hi, Kurt!" on the screen, and also print it out so that you can see a paper copy saying, "Hi, Kurt!" but not keep a stored record of having shown or printed out any such thing, and indicating that during those precise seconds it was displaying and printing out a message that said, "Hi, Pat!" Watching a computer screen or looking at a computer printout is no proof of what actually went on in the vote-tallying process.
What I'm trying to say is that this particular ROV proved incapable of letting the public view the tallying process for two elections in a row, and that I believe such incompetence should be grounds for termination. I'm not saying that all ROVs or E.D.'s are incompetent, just that this one has been proven to be incompetent. |
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 123
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, April 29, 2006 - 4:13 pm: |
|
Mark,
Likely that one and hundreds, if not thousands, of others. The lack of sophistication and knowledge of many ROV's and ED's would likely curl your hair.
Remember, most ROV's and ED's are career bureaucratic employees, without any particular expertise in elections. Their last job might have been in the Mapping Dept., the Assessor's Office, or even in Domestic Relations. Frequently, the main criterion for being hired in an elections office is to be an obseqious bureaucrat who never questions your superiors. I didn't fit that description and hence I am no longer so employed. Coincidence? I think not. |
Mark E. Smith
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Folkie
Post Number: 7
Registered: 08-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, April 29, 2006 - 5:02 pm: |
|
Okay, you've snapped me back to the real world, Kurt. Thank you.
An ROV is not likely to be fired for mere incompetence, but is very likely to be forced out for not going along to get along.
Got it. Sorry for wasting everyone's time. |
Catherine Ansbro
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Catherine_a
Post Number: 2230
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, April 29, 2006 - 5:13 pm: |
|
Not a waste!
It's very helpful (crucial, in fact) to understand the lay of the land.
Also, who knows--in one state or another there might be more legal structure to support what you suggest, depending on the ethos of the current office-holders or judiciary. |
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 124
Registered: 04-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, April 29, 2006 - 5:15 pm: |
|
Mark,
Don't take it that way. Just understand the nature of the beast. The first thing that needs to happen is that election administration needs to be professionalized. Now in big jurisdictions, like San Diego, there's no excuse. Those kinds of places should be expected to have professionals at the helm.
The further you get away from population centers, however, expect people who are not quite "rocket scientists". Sorry, until counties and localities get serious about election administration, that's just the way it is.
I know a county election director who is not only a one-woman department, but she runs the assessment appeals office, too. Again, elections are many times NOT run by professionals. I wish it was otherwise, but it just isn't.
Maybe we need to all start there. |
Jim March
Moderator
Username: Jimmarch
Post Number: 158
Registered: 01-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, May 3, 2006 - 3:14 pm: |
|
There is a California bill sponsored by Sen. Debra Bowen that tries to clean up Election Code 15004 (SB1747):
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_1747&sess=CUR&house=B&author=bowen
Among other things, it tells the California SecState to define the criteria for the "specialists/engineers".
I would recommend as a start writing up a statement as to what happened. You could even put it in declaration form if you want. Get it into Bowen's office as support for SB1747. EMail it to me (jim@blackboxvoting.org) and I can pass it along to Evan Goldberg and Darrin Chesin in Bowen's office.
Attached to this find a "blank declaration" in MS-Word format.
* * * * * *
* * * * * *
* * * * * *
* * * * * *
TRIPLE PROTECTION FOR ELECTION 2006 - STARTING NOW:
(1) Use Freedom of Information, public records requests ("All American Paper Chase")
(2) Try Dumpster Diving for Democracy
(3) Candid America Project - Don't leave home without your camcorder
HOW TO DO IT: http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/6/6.html
|
Bruce Sims
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ubetchaiam
Post Number: 754
Registered: 06-2005
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, May 4, 2006 - 10:00 am: |
|
For Kurt; the Green Party DOES hold primaries.
For everyone else: Unless there is evidence that shows the ROV took action that could/did change the outcome of the election, there is no legal recourse for 'removal'; all that can be done-at least in CA- is to bring evidence to the Board of Supervisors asking for removal/punishment.
A citizen's petition with associated evidence presented to the BOS is another option; the REAL difficulty/issue -and it extends throughout all levels and aspects of government is 'accountability'. |
|
|
blank declaration
