Saturday, June 21, 2008

Boulder County Clerk questioned on her mail-in ballot promotion

From: Al Kolwicz [Colorado Voter Group Trustee]
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 1:42 PM
To: Hillary Hall [Boulder County Clerk & Recorder]
Cc: 'Colorado Voter Group'; Canvass Board Group; John Fryar ; Matt Sebastian ; Richard Valenty; Bob Greenlee
Subject: Unsolicited promotional mailing

Dear Ms. Hall,

We have conducted some research on your recent “Why wait in line… vote at home!” promotional mailing. We have several questions regarding the mailing:
  1. What section of the law authorizes the clerk to use public money to promote one method of voting over all others? (We use the word promote because the packet is unquestionably a promotional push marketing package. We cannot find such a promotional mailing in the law.)
  2. Before the package was mailed, was the package discussed with the political parties? The Secretary of State? The public?
  3. What funding was used to finance this unsolicited and unnecessary mailing?
  4. Approximately what was the total cost of the promotion, including design of the package and processing of responses?
  5. To whom was this mailing sent? (We have reports from households where some electors did and some did not receive the mailing.)
  6. How is it being verified that it is the eligible elector who submitted the request for mail-in voting? Have signatures been verified?
  7. Since the return-form enclosed in the promotional mailing is not the county’s official mail-in application form and is not in the form of a letter from the elector, by what authority has the clerk accepted this form as a valid application?
  8. The form included with the mailing has several significant flaws which very likely will have deceived some electors into signing up for permanent mail-in status. For example, there is no way that the elector can use the form for a one time mail-in ballot application. Also, the form does not provide the elector with the option to remove their name from the list. Also, the form does not notify the elector that they may ignore the request without risk of losing their right to vote using other voting methods including one-time mail-in voting.
  9. Would a privately designed return-form/promotion indicating an elector’s preference for in-person voting be accepted as a valid transaction by the clerk?
  10. By what authority does this mailing qualify as “Official Election Mail”?
  11. The return envelope indicates “Official Ballot Enclosed”, yet there is no such ballot.
  12. The package does not alert the elector to any of the problems of vote by mail, including direct and indirect disenfranchisement.
We look forward to your response.

Regards,

Al Kolwicz
Colorado Voter Group


========================

From: Hall, Hillary [Boulder County Clerk & Recorder]
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 11:57 PM
To: Al Kolwicz [Colorado Voter Group Trustee]
Subject: RE: Unsolicited promotional mailing

1. What section of the law authorizes the clerk to use public money to promote one method of voting over all others? (We use the word promote because the packet is unquestionably a promotional push marketing package. We cannot find such a promotional mailing in the law.)

My job as County Clerk and Recorder is to make voters aware of all the ways they may participate in an election. I know you are opposed to mail ballot elections and voting by mail, however it is a legal way to participate in the election and many prefer to do so. State legislature passed a law last year allowing voters to sign up as permanent mail-ballot voter if they so choose. County Clerks have the statutory authority to perform voter education and outreach, as well as to manage elections in the manner that puts taxpayers' dollars to the most effective use while still meeting strong requirements for security, accuracy and anonymity. Boulder County's recent mailing notified voters about this new option and is in no way prohibited by the law. The postage per envelope did not exceed standard non-profit pricing for a single letter.

In addition, as Boulder County Clerk & Recorder, I'm dedicated to upholding the democratic right to vote for all County residents and ensuring fair, accessible, accurate elections. This includes offering secure options that will enable the greatest number of eligible voters to cast their votes. We will continue to provide polling place elections in Boulder County as well as the options to vote early, and vote by mail. Voting by mail is an option for voters; not a single voter will be forced to sign up to vote by mail. Following is the statute passed by our legislature:

1-8-104.5. Application for permanent mail-in voter status. (1) Any eligible elector may apply for permanent mail-in voter status. The application for permanent mail-in voter status shall be made in writing or by facsimile using an application form furnished by the designated election official or in the form of a letter. The application shall contain the same information submitted in connection with an application for a mail-in ballot pursuant to section 1-8-104. (2) Upon receipt of an application for permanent mail-in voter status, the designated election official shall process the application in the same manner as an application for a mail-in ballot. If it is determined that the applicant is an eligible elector, the designated election official shall place the eligible elector's name upon the list maintained pursuant to section 1-8-108 of those eligible electors to whom a mail-in ballot is mailed each time there is a coordinated election.

2. Before the package was mailed, was the package discussed with the political parties? The Secretary of State? The public?

As part of my obligation to Boulder County registered voters, it is my duty to notify voters of their voting options. This mailing did exactly that: inform voters that they now have the option to vote by mail permanently. The contents of this mailing contained no reference to or bias towards any political party or candidate, and were in complete accordance with Colorado Revised Statues. Therefore, there was no reason to request approval with the Secretary of State's office or the political parties. I value and revere our country's democracy, in which the public has the power to express their wishes by electing representatives to make governmental choices on their behalf. By virtue of being an elected - rather than appointed - position, the Clerk and Recorder's office that I fill comes with the inherent understanding that the public has expressed their trust that I, as their representative, will make discretionary choices that represent their best interests; if the public feels that those choices are out of line with their desires, they are welcome to contact me or, ultimately, to voice their opinion through the power of the vote next term. Judging by the response to the mail ballot program in which more than 50,000 voters have signed up, the mail-ballot program and associated outreach do, indeed, have the tacit support of a very significant portion of the public.

3. What funding was used to finance this unsolicited and unnecessary mailing?

As the Boulder County Clerk & Recorder, I have a financial responsibility to make our elections as economical as possible while providing our voters with the voting methods they prefer to use. I am responsible for managing the elections' budget. The financing of this mailing was part of this budget. Furthermore, the return on investment of the mailing is significant in terms of total savings of public dollars. Providing the option to vote by mail saves valuable tax dollars. Delivering a mail ballot costs half as much as delivering a ballot to a polling location. In fact, the 2007 Coordinated Election, conducted entirely by mail-in ballots cost $X less than the 2006 General Election. In addition, the majority of voters did not object to voting by mail in the 2007 Coordinated Election.

This mailing was not unnecessary. While we will continue to provide polling place elections in Boulder County, it is also my responsibility to make voting by mail accessible to the registered voters in Boulder County who prefer this method and to notify them of their right to vote by mail.

4. Approximately what was the total cost of the promotion, including design of the package and processing of responses?

The total cost was $21,000.

5. To whom was this mailing sent? (We have reports from households where some electors did and some did not receive the mailing.)

This mailing was sent to all registered voters that voted in the 2004 and 2006 election and are registered at the same address during this time period. Mobile voters do not make a good demographic for permanent mail as we need to make sure that the ballot is delivered to the correct address.

6. How is it being verified that it is the eligible elector who submitted the request for mail-in voting? Have signatures been verified?

As long as the elector is a registered voter, there is no law that requires verification of a mail-in ballot application. However, we will verify the signature of the voter upon the return of their voted mail-in ballot.

7. Since the return-form enclosed in the promotional mailing is not the county's official mail-in application form and is not in the form of a letter from the elector, by what authority has the clerk accepted this form as a valid application?

According to Colorado Revised Statute 1-8-104.5. Application for permanent mail-in voter status. (1) Any eligible elector may apply for permanent mail-in voter status. The application for permanent mail-in voter status shall be made in writing or by facsimile using an application form furnished by the designated election official or in the form of a letter. The application shall contain the same information submitted in connection with an application for a mail-in ballot pursuant to section 1-8-104. (2) Upon receipt of an application for permanent mail-in voter status, the designated election official shall process the application in the same manner as an application for a mail-in ballot. If it is determined that the applicant is an eligible elector, the designated election official shall place the eligible elector's name upon the list maintained pursuant to section 1-8-108 of those eligible electors to whom a mail-in ballot is mailed each time there is a coordinated election.

8. The form included with the mailing has several significant flaws which very likely will have deceived some electors into signing up for permanent mail-in status. For example, there is no way that the elector can use the form for a one-time mail-in ballot application. Also, the form does not provide the elector with the option to remove their name from the list. Also, the form does not notify the elector that they may ignore the request without risk of losing their right to vote using other voting methods including one-time mail-in voting.

The purpose of this mailing was to inform voters of their right to sign up to vote by mail permanently. It is clearly stated on the application form, that in order "to receive the permanent ballot form, you are required to check the box below." We did not send this form to electors who were already signed up to vote by mail. Therefore, there was no reason to provide the option to remove their name from the list. Any elector who wishes to remove their name from the vote by mail list can do so at any time. The form does not indicate in any way that a voter would lose their right to vote if they disregarded the form. While voters continue to sign up to vote by mail every day from this mailing, there are voters who have simply disregarded the mailing, knowing there is no risk to their registration status. Finally, this is part of a greater outreach and education campaign in which we have clearly stated voters' various options, including polling place voting, signing up as a one-time mail ballot recipient or signing up to be a permanent mail-ballot voter, not to mention signing up to be a Boulder County election judge. You can visit, www.VoteBoulder.org <http://www.VoteBoulder.org> for examples of this language.

9. Would a privately designed return-form/promotion indicating an elector's preference for in-person voting be accepted as a valid transaction by the clerk?

Current statue does not address this. If an election is conducted by all mail, then the voter would receive a ballot in the mail.

10. By what authority does this mailing qualify as "Official Election Mail"?

Mail sent from the Boulder County Clerk & Recorder's Elections Division qualifies as official election mail. The statement "Official Election Mail" simply notifies voters that it is mail regarding elections.

11. The return envelope indicates "Official Ballot Enclosed", yet there is no such ballot.

The language that you are referencing is on a graphic on the upper left hand corner of the return envelope. The graphic falls under the language 'Why Wait in Line, Vote at Home'. In its context, this graphic where the language appears on a small picture of an envelope is a representation of voting from home on Election Day; it is not meant to indicate the return envelope is a ballot.

12. The package does not alert the elector to any of the problems of vote by mail, including direct and indirect disenfranchisement.

Voting by mail does not disenfranchise voters in any way. Colorado law provides for voters to vote by mail. Furthermore, voting by mail is absolutely safe. Voters' signatures are concealed on the return envelope and their signatures must be verified with the signature in our online database. Additionally, all voters take an oath when they register to vote. It is a federal offense to tamper with another voter's ballot or mail.

==================

Thursday, June 19, 2008

More about forbidden secret ballots

-- 1 of 2 --
From: Hall, Hillary [Boulder County Clerk & Recorder]
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 9:05 AM
To: Al Kolwicz [Trustee Colorado Voter Group]
Cc: 'Colorado Voter Group'; CFVI; Paper TigersSubject:
RE: Anonymous ballots

Al and everyone,

So here is the longer answer that I was unable to write to you the first time. We may be able to run the primary with out bar codes, not sure and haven't had time to test. We can not run the general with out the bar codes as it will be a two page ballot and ballots must be in page order. I will not be changing processes from the primary to the general. Do I want to find a way to get the bar codes off the ballot and make sure we have a reliable election yes, will the bar codes be removed this year no. I did not pick this system and I must make the best of it that I can. The long term solution is to either work with the vendor to change the system or look at a new system. All of these are issues for the 2009 year. When we have time to experiment and properly test any changes in process that may give us all the outcomes we want. We are not only heading into the largest election ever, we are also going to be using a new voter registration system. My first priority is to insure that the election both primary and general run smoothly. Changing processes between elections with no time to test out the new methods if it they are even viable is not the best way to ensure for a successful election.

Hillary

=============================
-- 2 of 2 --
From: Al Kolwicz [Trustee Colorado Voter Group]
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 9:31 AM
To: 'Hall, Hillary' [Boulder County Clerk & Recorder]
Cc: 'Colorado Voter Group'; CFVI; Paper Tigers;'Bev Harris'
Subject: RE: Anonymous ballots

Ms. Hall,

The Secretary of State’s certification process did not report that the HART system is unable to comply with Colorado law regarding anonymous ballots.

To our knowledge, there is no documented exception or condition describing such a defect.

When we directly asked HART about this, on the record and in front of the Secretary of State’s personnel, HART made no exceptions when they testified that the system works without unique serial numbers. In fact, HART indicated that this is the way that the system is usually used.

We must assume that you have been misinformed, or we have been misinformed.

If it is true that the HART system cannot comply with Colorado’s laws regarding secret ballots, the system was improperly certified and must be immediately removed from the certified equipment list.

Al Kolwicz
Colorado Voter Group

Wednesday, June 18, 2008

Colorado Clerk forbids voting by secret ballot

From: Al Kolwicz [Trustee, Colorado Voter Group]
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 11:54 AM
To: Hillary Hall [Boulder County Clerk & Recorder]
Subject: Anonymous ballots

Hi Hillary,

Yesterday, at the Public Demonstration, HART demonstrated how to set up ballots with no unique identifiers (not digits or bar code). They set the bar code value to a constant of “0”.

Also, they demonstrated how to set up the ballot with a removable ballot stub. The stub can contain a serial number. They indicated that this is a very commonly used form of ballot. HART produces these ballots.

We recommend that Boulder County use ballots with serial numbers recorded on removable stubs. This will comply with the Colorado Constitution, Article VII section 8, and will provide the audit trail needed for ballot integrity.

Can we count on Boulder County to use ballots with serial numbers recorded on removable stubs for the 2008 elections?

Thanks

Al

---------------------------------------------------------

From: Hall, Hillary [Boulder County Clerk & Recorder]
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 8:00 AM
To: Al Kolwicz [Trustee, Colorado Voter Group]
Subject: RE: Anonymous ballots

Al,

After reviewing the system and how it functions. We will be using the system as it has been designed. While it MAY be able to use the system without bar codes for the primary, we must use the bar codes for the general. Therefore, we will be using the system as it has been designed.

The long term solution to this problem is to purchase a new system. At this point in time, there is neither a system that I could recommend switching to nor the funds to do so.

Hillary

---------------------------------------------------------

From: Al Kolwicz [Trustee, Colorado Voter Group]
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 12:35 PM
To: 'Hall, Hillary' [Boulder County Clerk & Recorder]
Cc: Colorado Voter Group; CFVI, Paper Tigers
Subject: RE: Anonymous ballots

Ms. Hall,

Your reply is a great disappointment. Based on your pre-election statements, we were counting on you to eliminate Boulder County’s use of non-secret ballots.

We have been told, on the record by HART officials, that the HART system is designed to use paper ballots with removable stubs so that the serial numbers [can be removed before the ballot is cast, and] so that the voter cannot identify their own ballot once it has been cast. After all, if this were not the case it would violate Colorado’s Constitution and the system could not have been certified, could it?

Please reconsider your decision before it is too late. The voters of Boulder County expect and deserve secret ballots. It is your decision alone to deprive us of this right.

Al Kolwicz
Colorado Voter Group