May 09, 2008

Providing legal resources and election news to California election officials and the attorneys who represent them.

« February 2007 | Main | April 2007 »

March 30, 2007

Voting machines topic at Riverside County hearing

"Finnish computer programmer Harri Hursti has not attempted to hack into the county's voting machines, but he will share at a public hearing today how vulnerable electronic systems can be.

"Upon an in-depth review, we believe that electronic systems can never be made transparent enough or secure enough so that voters can have complete confidence that the vote is counted as cast," said Tom Courbat, executive director of SAVE R VOTE, a watchdog group that oversees Riverside County elections and orchestrated Hursti's visit."

Last year, Hursti hacked into a Diebold voting system on the HBO documentary "Hacking Democracy."

Today's blue ribbon committee meeting is the third and final public hearing. It will be at 9 a.m. at Palm Desert City Hall council chambers."

The story is here.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 08:56 AM | Permalink. . .

"The ballot measure that wouldn't die"

From the Capitol Weekly:

"The unintended ballot measure would prohibit the state from diverting gas-tax money from local governments and putting it into the general fund. The "Transportation Funding Protection Act," as it was dubbed by its proponents, was supposed to be dead long before it reached the ballot--because state lawmakers put Proposition 1A, a similar protection, on the November 2006 ballot. That measure passed easily.

It was the California Alliance for Jobs, a coalition of construction companies and building trades unions, that cooked up the-initiative-that-would-not-die. Alliance Executive Director Jim Earp explained that his organization started planning a ballot initiative after years of frustration with the state Legislature, which every year raided transportation money set aside under Proposition 42. That measure, passed by voters in 2002, dedicated most of the revenue from gasoline taxes to improving streets, highways and transit systems.

"After a couple of years of getting the runaround," Earp and the Alliance launched a signature-gathering campaign for a November 2006 ballot initiative to close Capitol the Proposition 42 loophole. "Once we got up to about a million signatures, people sort of woke up."

By spring of 2006, the Alliance was making some progress with legislative leaders--but not enough to completely abandon their ballot initiative.

"We decided we'd not turn in the last 300,000 or so signatures," Earp recalled.

Earp said the signature-gathering consultant told them that if they turned in some, but not all, of the signatures that had been gathered, the Alliance could keep the measure from qualifying outright. But it would still be "in the pipeline" if needed. That was the plan.

As it turned out, the Legislature did craft a deal, in the form of Proposition 1A. It wasn't as aggressive as the Alliance measure--it still allowed the state to borrow money from Proposition 42 funds under certain conditions.

Good enough. The group sent out press releases crowing that the signature-gathering campaign worked to pressure lawmakers to make a deal. Then the campaign switched gears, dropping its own ballot measure effort in order to concentrate on supporting Proposition 1A.

"We trashed 300,000 signatures that we'd paid for," worth about $400,000, Earp explained. And that was that.

But the initiative wasn't dead yet.

"It was really the Los Angeles County signatures that did it. That was the big surprise," Earp continued, explaining where things went wrong.
In Los Angeles County, in particular, the number of signatures that were verified as being valid came back exceptionally high. "It was around 68 or 70 percent. Really high."

Posted by Randy Riddle at 08:52 AM | Permalink. . .

"Election officials object to audit"

"A proposed audit of statewide voting systems is poorly timed and unfairly focuses on electronic machines, such as the ones used by voters in San Joaquin County, election officials across the state have complained.

San Joaquin County Registrar of Voters Deborah Hench has joined others who run local elections in California to criticize Secretary of State Debra Bowen's proposed "top-to-bottom review" of state voting equipment. Bowen promised the audit during her campaign for the office last year and recently published a draft plan of how she plans to judge the systems.

Hench said the state's new draft criteria rewrites the rules under which the Diebold TSx and other electronic voting equipment were approved last year. San Joaquin County voters cast ballots on the ATM-like Diebold machines in both of last year's elections, as well as the March 2004 primary.

The equipment could be decertified by summer if it doesn't pass the new requirements, which include more advanced technology for disabled voters and a battery of testing from computer experts for security flaws. And, because state legislators recently moved the upcoming presidential primary to February, there won't be enough time to make adjustments before the next election.

"The way I read it," Hench said of the review's criteria, "it's meant to decertify all e-voting."

If the TSx machines were to be decertified, county voters would vote on paper ballots in February, Hench said. The cost of going to paper is not clear, although Hench believes the presidential primary alone would require a half-million ballots to be printed to ensure each precinct doesn't run low.

The state Association of Clerks and Election Officials criticized the draft criteria in a letter sent to Bowen's office earlier this week. The group asked for more time to review the audit's proposed standards, arguing that the six-day public comment window that ends today is too short for proper study.

Nicole Winger, a spokeswoman for Bowen's office, said the state opened the testing criteria for public review only in the interest of open government, saying the last such review, conducted by former Secretary of State Bruce McPherson, wasn't open to scrutiny. Winger also questioned the sense of postponing the audit because of an upcoming election when security concerns surrounding e-voting are what prompted the review."

The story is here.

The SF Chronicle offers this related story.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 08:47 AM | Permalink. . .

March 28, 2007

Appeal expected in Orange County recount case

From the LA Times:

"A judge ruled Monday that Janet Nguyen won the February election for an Orange County Board of Supervisors seat by a slim three-vote margin, rejecting arguments by her opponent that a recount wasn't completed because the paper audit of electronically cast ballots was not counted manually.

"All the votes were counted," said Orange County Superior Court Judge Michael Brenner. "There was a full and legal recount."

Brenner also ruled that state law allows the person seeking and paying for the recount to choose the method by which votes are counted.

It was, he said, "perfectly reasonable" for Janet Nguyen to ask for about 35,000 paper absentee ballots to be checked by hand to contest ones that weren't filled out properly and then ask to have about 10,000 electronic votes recounted the way they were on election night — by machine.

"The evidence in this case found no complaints about the [performance of election] machines," Brenner said, adding that recounting the paper audit "probably wouldn't show a great deal anyway."

His decision capped a contentious four-day trial sought by Trung Nguyen, whose initial lead in the 1st District race was overturned by the recount.

Janet Nguyen is expected to be sworn in today by supervisors, who had voted this month to let a court sort out the legal issues involved in the case. The clerk of the board was in the courtroom Monday to hand the winner a stack of documents outlining issues on today's meeting agenda.

"I'm ready. I've been ready," Janet Nguyen said after the hearing. "I respect the system, I respect the process, and I'm very excited by the ruling…. This election separated all of us. My goal now is to … unify everybody."

Trung Nguyen, who is not related to the winner, declined to comment and left the courthouse as his attorney, Michael Schroeder, said an appeal was likely. "Why would you have a paper record if you don't count it?" Schroeder said. "I believe the law is crystal clear."

Posted by Randy Riddle at 09:34 AM | Permalink. . .

"County registrar scrambles to hold early presidential primary"

"As the state gears up for an early presidential primary, County Clerk Gail Pellerin said Monday she is worried the plan will wear out voters and poll workers and cost the county hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Pellerin said she already has encountered poll workers who don't want to work three elections in 52 weeks and is concerned the state won't reimburse the county the expected $450,000 cost of the election.

It's not that her office can't do it, she said. But "we don't plan to take any vacation"

California voters will choose their White House nominees on Feb. 3 next year, four months earlier than originally scheduled.

The decision by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and state Legislature to move up the primary was designed to give more clout to the nation's most populous state in picking the Republican and Democratic presidential nominees. The race was previously set for June 5. But by that time, supporters of the change say, many other states would have held their primary elections, and California's vote would hold little sway.

Now, only the Iowa and Nevada caucuses and the New Hampshire and South Carolina primaries are held earlier, though other states are considering moving their primaries, too.

But while the earlier voting may be a boon to state residents and politicians, county registrars like Pellerin — who say they need about a year to plan an election — are trying to figure out how to make it all work."

The story is here.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 09:31 AM | Permalink. . .

"Tougher standards could end e-voting"

From the Oakland Tribune:

"California's elections chief is proposing the toughest standards for voting systems in the country, so tough that they could banish ATM-like touch-screen voting machines from the state.

For the first time, California is demanding the right to try hacking every voting machine with "red teams" of computer experts and to study the software inside the machines, line-by-line, for security holes.

The proposals are the first step toward fulfilling a promise that Secretary of State Debra Bowen made during her 2006 election campaign to perform a "top-to-bottom" review of all voting machinery used in California.

County elections officials balked at the proposed standards in a letter Monday to Bowen and hinted broadly at the same conclusion reached by several computer scientists: If enforced rigidly, the standards could send many voting machines, especially touch-screens, back for major upgrades. Local elections officials argued that there isn't enough time to fix any deficiencies before the February presidential primary.

"When they moved that election up 119 days, I think the door closed on any significant changes to election systems for the presidential cycle in 2008," said Steve Weir, president of the California Association of Clerks and Elections Officials, and chief elections officer in Contra Costa County.

Advocates for stronger security in voting machinery applauded Bowen's standards and said it marked a refreshing change from regulating voting
Advertisement

systems based heavily on what manufacturers were willing to sell.

"Debra Bowen is holding up voting machines to the standards they deserve," said Avi Rubin, a computer science professor at Johns Hopkins University who published one of the first technical critiques of e-voting software. "I don't know of any other state in the country that requires red team testing of voting machines, and I've long maintained that this is the only reasonable way to test security."

You can find additional articles about this issue here and here.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 09:06 AM | Permalink. . .

March 26, 2007

Diebold sue Massachusetts over voting machine contract

"One of the nation’s top manufacturers of voting machines is taking the state to court Monday to try to block distribution of machines for the disabled in Massachusetts, saying it was unfairly denied the lucrative contract.

An attorney for Diebold Election Systems Inc. said the company should have been awarded the $9 million contract if Secretary of State William Galvin followed his own criteria when deciding which firm the state should contract with for the new machines.

”Diebold’s proposal provided the best value to the commonwealth,” said William Weisberg, an attorney for Diebold. ”We believe that using those criteria correctly Diebold should have received the award.”

Those criteria include cost, the ability of the company to meet the scope of the request, and the degree to which the machines met technical requirements.

Galvin called the lawsuit ”frivolous” and ”sour grapes on the part of Diebold.”

”We’ve gone through an exhaustive process consulting with the disabled community to find out what’s best for them,” Galvin told The Associated Press. ”We certainly don’t feel like we have an obligation to help (Diebold) market their equipment.”

Diebold’s lawsuit, set to be heard in Suffolk Superior Court on Monday, seeks to block distribution until the court can rule on the merits of the company’s case.

Under the 2002 federal Help America Vote Act, the state is required to have voting machines for the physically impaired. Galvin said the goal is to have a machine in each of the state’s 1,700 polling locations.

Galvin said part of the problem was finding machines that could work for voters with a wide range of disabilities. The goal is to have a machine that disabled voters can use without the help of poll workers or others - in part to protect the secrecy of their ballots.

Galvin chose AutoMARK voting machines, in part because he said the machines produce the same kind of ballot card as other voting machines, so the ballots could be counted together. He said the Diebold machines produced a paper trail that could compromise the secrecy of ballots cast."

The article is here.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 10:39 AM | Permalink. . .

Proposed legislation to clarify procedure when candidate dies

"With the special election for Mendocino County district attorney less than two weeks away, State Sen. Patricia Wiggins (D-Santa Rosa), has proposed a bill to clarify the laws governing special elections.

Wiggins' bill, SB 813, would clarify California Elections Code 8026 to apply only to those elections where a candidate dies within 68 days of a primary election.

"With all the turmoil that has surrounded the district attorney's race is Mendocino County, I believe this is the best way to prevent that kind of problem from occurring in the future," Wiggins said. "Clearly, triggering a special election during a runoff doesn't serve the voters, the candidates or the county, which gets stuck paying the bill, very well."

Wiggins is referring to the 2006 Mendocino County district attorney race, during which incumbent DA Norman Vroman died within 47 days of the election, leaving Fort Bragg attorney Meredith Lintott the only living candidate still in the race.

The Board of Supervisors followed California Elections Code 1504, which says that if a candidate dies within 68 days of the election, the candidate's name remains on the ballot. In the event the deceased candidate is elected, the Board of Supervisors fills the seat until the next election.

Assistant District Attorney Keith Faulder, who was acting as interim district attorney at the time, rejected that interpretation and said Section 8026 was the correct elections code to apply and challenged the county in
Advertisement
[Click Here]
California District Court.

The court eventually sided with Faulder, nullifying the November 2006 district attorney election and sealing the results. The California Supreme Court upheld the lower court's interpretation on appeal.

"The court's decision set a new precedent given that the intent and history of Section 8026 only applied to primary elections," Wiggins said. "In addition to reversing both the intent and history by applying Section 8026 to runoff elections, that decision will likely result in significant unnecessary costs, delays and added confusion for voters."

The article is here.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 09:23 AM | Permalink. . .

Ruling due today in Orange County recount lawsuit

From the Orange County Register:

"A judge on Friday overturned the Orange County registrar of voters' decision on four recounted ballots cast in a February Board of Supervisors race, leaving Janet Nguyen just three votes ahead of opponent Trung Nguyen.

Superior Court Judge Hugh Michael Brenner's rulings put to rest one of the two main arguments in Trung Nguyen's attempt to invalidate the recount, which overturned his Feb. 3 election-day victory.

On Monday, Brenner will take up the contention that the recount was never completed because a paper trail audit of the electronic vote wasn't counted manually.

Brenner said he would also hand down a ruling on the recount, a decision that — after weeks of fighting and posturing — should result in the seating of a new supervisor for the central county district.

On Friday, Brenner considered 32 absentee ballots with extraneous writing, drawings or other markings that Trung Nguyen sought to have changed in his favor: Some were votes for him that Registrar Neal Kelley disallowed; others were votes for Janet Nguyen that Trung Nguyen's attorneys argued Kelley should have thrown out.

"It's very hard to guess the intent of the voter in all these odd markings," said Brenner, referring to the variety of squiggles, mark-outs and messages on the ballots. But, he said, "you have to draw the line somewhere."

After listening to a barrage of nuanced legal arguments and case law citations from attorneys for the candidates and the registrar, Brenner said he intended to rule on each ballot with consistency in mind."

Posted by Randy Riddle at 09:21 AM | Permalink. . .

More on the effects of the new primary on local election officials

"The state's move to strengthen its national political clout by moving the 2008 presidential primary to February will disenfranchise voters and overburden the San Joaquin County elections office, the county's top elections official said.

Registrar of Voters Deborah Hench also said the decision to hold the primary four months earlier than previously scheduled, while maintaining a state and local primary in June and the general election in November, could cost county taxpayers $1.8million. The county is expected to front the cost of printing and mailing ballots and paying volunteers for the Feb. 5 primary, and there are no guarantees that the money will be paid back, she said.

"They say they want to reimburse," Hench said in an interview. "But they don't say how, exactly."

The earlier primary, approved by state legislators in early March and signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger last week, is intended to give California voters an earlier shot at choosing presidential nominees for November. The state's last presidential primary was conducted in March 2004.

In that primary, however, voters cast ballots for local and state offices as well as for president. Next year, county voters will be asked to show up at the polls three times - a tall request for a county that saw little more half its 275,000 registered voters cast ballots this past November.

"They're going to have to start giving free sandwiches away," joked former Stockton Councilman Gary Giovanetti, who is running for termed-out county Supervisor Steve Gutierrez's District 1 seat next year."

The article is here.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 09:16 AM | Permalink. . .

March 22, 2007

Secretary of State Bowen Releases Draft Criteria for Voting System Review

"Secretary of State Debra Bowen today unveiled her proposed draft criteria that will be used to conduct a thorough top-to-bottom review of the voting machines certified for use in California.

“The review is designed to restore people’s confidence in the integrity of our electoral process,” said Secretary Bowen, the state’s chief elections officer. “Every California voter has the right to have their vote counted as it was cast. This first-of-its-kind top-to-bottom review is designed to ensure that California voters are being asked to cast their ballots on machines that are secure, accurate, accessible, and auditable.”

The press release is here.

The draft criteria can be found here.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 05:08 PM | Permalink. . .

March 21, 2007

"Court Overturns Phone Jamming Conviction"

From the Washington Post:

"A federal appeals court on Wednesday reversed the conviction and sentence of a former Republican National Committee official accused in a phone-jamming plot on Election Day 2002.

James Tobin, the former regional chairman of President Bush's re-election campaign, was convicted in 2005 of helping to arrange more than 800 hang-up calls that jammed get-out-the-vote phone lines set up by the state Democratic Party and the Manchester firefighters' union for about an hour. Republican John Sununu defeated then-Gov. Jeanne Shaheen for the Senate that day.

But the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston ruled that the statute under which Tobin was convicted "is not a close fit" for what Tobin did and questioned whether the government showed that Tobin intended to harass. A Justice Department spokesman said prosecutors were reviewing the decision, and did not say if they planned to appeal."

Posted by Randy Riddle at 04:13 PM | Permalink. . .

"Battle for supes seat in court"

"One had the initial "KT." Another had a drawing of a flower in black ink. Two had handwritten messages in Vietnamese that read, "Please do not speak ill of others (thank you)."

Those are just three of the ballots at the center of a court battle starting today that will finally resolve who won the 1st District supervisor's seat. With the difference between winner Janet Nguyen and Trung Nguyen just seven votes, each ballot is a battle."

The article is here.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 09:17 AM | Permalink. . .

March 20, 2007

"Machines record votes inaccurately in tests"

"Voting machines malfunctioned repeatedly during testing Monday as Montgomery County (Ohio) officials responded to complaints that the touch-screen electronic machines inaccurately recorded votes during the November election.

Officials found more than two dozen machines out of 62 tested recorded votes inaccurately; they anticipate finding more problems today when they test another 63 machines.

"I'm surprised the number that we have here," said Mark Radke, director of marketing for voting machine supplier Diebold Elections Systems.

The failures raise concerns that an undetermined number of voters may have cast ballots without noticing the mistakes, said Ellis Jacobs, senior attorney for Advocates for Basic Legal Equality Inc.

Officials believe the machines properly tally the votes recorded, said Steve Harsman, director of the Montgomery County Board of Elections. The problem is that the machines did not always accurately record the vote in the first place."

The story is here.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 10:52 AM | Permalink. . .

March 12, 2007

Coin Toss Decides City Council Race

"A simple toss of a coin has unseated an incumbent on the Temple City City Council, it was reported Saturday.

Incumbent Dan Arrighi and former Councilman Fernando Vizcarra were in a dead heat after Tuesday's elections. Mary Flandrick, Temple City city clerk, suggested a coin toss to break the tie and Arrighi agreed.

"Dan was visibly upset," at the outcome, Vizcarra told the Pasadena Star-News. "I feel sorry for Dan," he continued. "This was no way to lose an election. I would have been happy to have another vote."

Another vote would have cost about $35,000.

Tuesday's Temple City municipal election had three council seats open and eight candidates, three incumbents and five challengers. Two incumbents, David Capra and Judy Wong, won re-election easily.

Vizcarra said he was so upset he didn't take part in the coin toss. "I didn't touch the coin," he told the Star-News. "I didn't call heads or tails. I refused to participate, but they did it anyway."

The article is here.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 08:59 AM | Permalink. . .

March 09, 2007

"Judge forbids second 1st District 'recount'"

From the Orange County Register:

"A judge Wednesday narrowed Trung Nguyen's legal challenge to the 1st District supervisor election by refusing a request to examine hundreds of thousands of ballots, saying it would be "another recount."

Superior Court Judge Michael Brenner turned down the plea to see more than 178,385 documents, including absentee and provisional ballots, because Nguyen's lawyers already saw them during the Registrar of Voters Office recount.

Nguyen, who came in second to Janet Nguyen by seven votes, is suing in hopes of changing the outcome or invalidating the Feb. 6 special election.

The Orange County Board of Supervisors has voted twice to put off declaring Janet Nguyen the winner until the judge makes a decision, expected after a March 21 trial.

Michael Houston, an attorney for Trung Nguyen, said they believed seven to nine ballots cast for Janet Nguyen could be found invalid because they suspected there were two instances in which one person cast several votes.

Leon Page, a county lawyer representing Registrar of Voters Neal Kelley, urged Brenner to refuse Trung Nguyen's request, saying they have no proof any ballots were mishandled and that the county was concerned about keeping voter records private."

Posted by Randy Riddle at 09:02 AM | Permalink. . .

March 08, 2007

"Hahn asks for probe of polling station problems"

"City Councilwoman Janice Hahn asked the city clerk Wednesday to investigate problems at polling stations during Tuesday's election.

Hahn went to the polling place listed on her sample ballot — the San Pedro Elks Lodge — only to be told that her polling place was elsewhere."

The article is here.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 09:55 AM | Permalink. . .

March 07, 2007

"Early presidential primary would cost counties plenty"

"Riverside and San Bernardino counties are likely to hold four major elections within 12 months if a bill that moves up next year's presidential primary from June to February is signed by Gov. Schwarzenegger.

The Assembly on Tuesday passed the bill on a party-line vote, 46 to 29, and sent it to the governor for his signature. Schwarzenegger has not taken a formal position on the bill, spokesman Aaron McLear said. But the governor has recently promoted the idea of holding an earlier primary.

Proponents, including the Legislature's majority Democrats, said the measure would give the state's nearly 16 million registered voters more of a voice in selecting next year's presidential nominees. In the past, presidential primary races have been all but over by the time Californians voted.

But opponents of SB 113, including Schwarzenegger's fellow Republicans in the Assembly, complained Tuesday that the measure fails to ensure that the Legislature will reimburse counties the estimated $60 million to $90 million it would cost to hold a presidential primary in February instead of June."

The article is here.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 09:34 AM | Permalink. . .

March 05, 2007

"County election laws challenged"

"The Secretary of State is looking into a complaint by a community watchdog group that says Riverside County has not fully complied with state election laws.

SAVE R VOTE - a Murietta-based community watchdog group created to oversee Riverside County elections - lodged the complaint Wednesday saying the registrar has failed to post precinct election results.

"It's a check against the accuracy of the centralized counting system," said Lowell Finley, deputy secretary of state for voting systems technology and policy.

"It's important because it provides a means for members of the public to verify that the counts issued by the voting machine in the polling places are accurately reflected in the final count."

Riverside County Registrar of Voters Barbara Dunmore said Thursday that she was not aware of the complaint.

California Elections Code reads, "The precinct board shall, before it adjourns, post conspicuously on the outside of the polling place a copy of the result of the votes cast at the polling place."

"I think that's an antiquated law and most counties in the state of California do not post the results," Dunmore said."

The article is here.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 09:36 AM | Permalink. . .

More on the Litigation Regarding the Orange County Supervsior Election

From the Orange County Register:

"An Orange County judge is expected to set a date for a trial, which should start within 10 days, to decide the contested election for the 1st District seat on the Board of Supervisors.

Judge Michael Brenner Friday told attorneys for candidates Janet Nguyen and Trung Nguyen to return to his court Monday to select a firm date for the trial. Brenner also ordered county Registrar of Voters Neal Kelley to provide evidence of 200 contested ballots to both sides, said attorney Steve Baric, who represents Trung Nguyen, said.

Janet Nguyen, 30, and a Garden Grove City Council member, finished a recount earlier this week seven votes ahead of Trung Nguyen, 49. Trung Nguyen had been certified the winner after a tally of late ballots from the Feb. 6 election to fill the central district seat ended with him seven votes ahead. The candidates, both Republicans, are not related."

Posted by Randy Riddle at 09:34 AM | Permalink. . .

"Diebold Weighs Strategy for Voting Unit"

From the Washington Post:

"Diebold Inc. saw great potential in the modernization of elections equipment. Now, analysts say, executives may be angling for ways to dump its e-voting subsidiary that's widely seen as tarnishing the company's reputation.

Though Diebold Election Systems _ the company's smallest business segment _ has shown growth and profit, it's faced persistent criticism over the reliability and security of its touch-screen voting machines. About 150,000 of its touch-screen or optical scan systems were used in 34 states in last November's election.

The criticism is particularly jarring for a nearly 150-year-old company whose primary focus has long been safes and automated teller machines.

"This is a company that has built relationships with banks every day of every year. It pains them greatly to see their brand tarnished by a marginal operating unit," said Gil Luria, an investment analyst who monitors Diebold for Wedbush Morgan Securities Inc.

In the calm after the November midterm elections, Tom Swidarski, Diebold's chief executive officer, told analysts in a conference call that the company plans to announce its long-term strategy for the elections unit early this year.

Swidarski declined an interview request to shed more light on the voting segment's future.

But in an annual report filed last week with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Diebold's discussion of its election systems business pointed out various ongoing concerns. Diebold acknowledged that complaints about its voting products and services have hurt relations with government election officials.

Diebold indicated it still is "vulnerable to these types of challenges because the electronic elections systems industry is emerging." The report also mentioned inconsistency in the way state and local governments are adapting to federal requirements for upgrades in voting technology."

Posted by Randy Riddle at 09:30 AM | Permalink. . .

March 02, 2007

"Recall Petition Hits Montebello City Council"

"Three Montebello City Council members have become the target of a recall petition campaign, it was reported.

Anna Arriola, representing Montebello Citizens for Honest Government, served Mayor Norma Lopez-Reid and council members Bob Bagwell and Jeff Siccama with the notice of intent at Wednesday's meeting, according to media reports.

The recall may also be motivated by concerns that the city fire department may be disbanded in favor of county services. The council, who won a new majority block in the 2005 election, has angered residents since several department heads were fired, according to Arriola."

The article is here.

Posted by Randy Riddle at 11:32 AM | Permalink. . .

March 01, 2007

"Early primary stresses budgets"

From the Sacramento Bee:

"Moving California's presidential primary election from June to February would stress counties physically and financially, El Dorado County officials say.

The Board of Supervisors on Tuesday authorized board chairwoman Helen Baumann to send a letter to state Sen. Ron Calderon, D-Montebello, opposing Calderon's Senate Bill 113, which would change the date of the 2008 primary to give the state more influence in choosing presidential candidates.

But supervisors argue that any increased clout would come at a high price to counties, particularly if the state does not reimburse them for the cost of the additional election. A third statewide election in 2008, board members said, would cost El Dorado County about $450,000.

Though the Senate bill states that the Legislature intends to fully reimburse counties for the costs of new elections, the draft letter says the board would oppose the bill unless the funding were clearly guaranteed.

The additional election also would stretch the county's human resources, the supervisors said, noting that El Dorado County would have to conduct four elections in a 12-month period."

Posted by Randy Riddle at 09:06 AM | Permalink. . .

syndicate this blog 

© 2008 Randy Riddle

home   postings   resources   about

design: sko media