Elections Commission
2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002
City and County of San Francisco
Elections Commission
Approved: July 16, 2003
Minutes of the Meeting held
July 2, 2003
1. President Rosenthal called the meeting to order at 7:10 pm.
2. COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioner Robert Kenealey, Commissioner Richard Shadoian, President Alix Rosenthal, Commissioner Thomas Schultz, and Commissioner Arnold Townsend. ABSENT: Vice President Michael Mendelson and Commissioner Brenda Stowers.
3. PRESIDENT'S REPORT::
President Rosenthal acknowledged the excellent public participation during the hearing on voter education and outreach on ranked choice voting at the last Commission meeting. She was glad to see that so many people came the meeting to offer suggestions and support for the Department's efforts, and she was also happy to see so many people at this meeting.
The President recognized the ongoing efforts by the Department staff. She stated that no one is working harder to make ranked choice voting a reality, and they should be applauded for their hard work.
President Rosenthal reported that the Secretary of State’s Office (“SoS”) has scheduled a meeting of its Voting Systems and Procedure Panel for July 28, 2003 at 1:00 pm., at 1500 Eleventh Street, First Floor Auditorium, in Sacramento. The meeting was originally scheduled for July 23rd. The Panel will be considering the DoE’s manual count procedures, and has the ability to certify at this meeting.
On July 1, 2003, Elections Systems & Software (ES&S) submitted its full application of a ranked choice system to the SoS. During his presentation to the Elections Commission on June 18, 2003, the ES&S representative, Joseph Taggard, told the Commission that the full application had already been submitted. However, it has been learned that the software was still being reviewed by the federal independent testing authority which has now approved and submitted the software. The Commission has been told that the application is now completely submitted.
Commissioner Townsend stated that he was disturbed that the ES&S presentation given to the Commission two weeks ago was inaccurate. This, he said, is unacceptable from a vendor and asked the Director to invite the ES&S representative to a future meeting to discuss his June 18th presentation.
President Rosenthal reminded everyone that the DoE had originally given ES&S a deadline of July 1st to deliver a fully tested and certified system, but the deadline was extended to August 1st in order to give ES&S as much time as possible without jeopardizing the DoE’s ability to complete necessary testing, training and outreach. President Rosenthal noted that planning for an election is a complicated, time-consuming process, and this Department has in effect been planning for four elections: (1) a ranked choice voting system using the eagle machines with ES&S software, (2) a ranked choice voting system using the Department’s partial hand count, (3) a possible run off election in the case that it is not possible to implement ranked choice voting, and (4) the presidential primary election in March.
Rosenthal said that despite the Department's best efforts, some of the critical steps to implementing RCV remain beyond the City's control. Members of the public, and members of the Board of Supervisors have begun to ask what will happen if, for example, the Secretary of State does not certify either the ES&S system or the Department's hand count plan.
The President stated that the reason the Elections Commission was created was to protect the franchise, to regain San Francisco’s confidence in the administration of its elections, and to make sure the elections are conducted in a way that is fair, efficient and cost-effective. She noted that it is also the Commission’s responsibility to ensure that when the voters change the way that elections operate, that the will of the voters is implemented in a fair and efficient way. The Commission is therefore obligated to insure that the Department does everything in its power to implement ranked choice voting.
President Rosenthal said that her primary goal, when she was appointed to the Commission, was to remove the Elections Department from politics, however, she was extremely disturbed to see politics now creeping into the process. Her hope is that political influences can be set aside, in order to have a rational discussion about what it will take to implement RCV, and protect the will of the voters, while protecting the integrity of the November election.
President Rosenthal stated that the upcoming election is very important because it includes a Mayor’s race, a DA’s race, and a sheriff’s race, and the Department may not be able to use sheriff’s deputies for ballot security.
The President formally asked the following questions of the City Attorney’s office and requested answers before the next Elections Commission Meeting:
(1) May the City use a ranked-choice voting system if that system has not been certified for use by the California Secretary of State?
(2) If the City does not have a certified and tested ranked-choice voting system in time for use in the November 2003 election, may the City use a ranked-choice ballot and hand-count those ballots?
(3) If the City does not have a certified and tested ranked-choice voting system in time for use in the November 2003 election, may the City conduct the election without using ranked-choice voting?
(4) May the City undertake contingency plans now for the November 2003 election that do not involve ranked-choice voting?
(5) If the City is unable to use ranked-choice voting in November 2003, and if no candidate receives a majority of the votes cast, would the candidate who receives the highest number of votes be elected, or would the two candidates receiving the most votes qualify for a separate run-off election to be held at a later date?
Commissioner Schulz said that he wanted to affirm that the Department was doing an excellent job of informing the public about ranked choice voting because he had invited the DoE to make a presentation before a group of citizen’s who had serious questions about RCV and the information provided was clear and understandable.
Public Comment: Michael Harris asked if the questions President Rosenthal mentioned in her report could be made available to the public. Charles Kalish thanked the President for her questions.
4. COMMITTEE REPORTS:
Budget Policy Committee – Commissioner Stowers, chair of this committee, was not able to attend tonight’s meeting.
5. Presentation by Rich Matthews of the Civil Grand Jury of the City and County of San Francisco.
Mr. Matthews reported that the Civil Grand Jury’s appointment twelve months ago expired last week. He gave a brief background explaining that each county has two civil grand juries, one for criminal indictments and one for civil investigations. The Civil Grand Jury is charged with oversight for all local government and has unlimited investigative authority to examine any aspect of City government, has authority to look at any documents, see any process, talk to anyone, ask any questions and has legal authority to require response to these requests.
The 19 members of the group are appointed each July 1st by the presiding judge of the Superior Court for a one year term, and each member can propose topics for investigation. The goal of each member is to “add value to the City.” A topic must be approved for investigation by twelve of the members. This year there were nine investigations and nine reports were made, all of which are available online. Every City agency gets reviewed every five or six years. The three elements of these reports are the facts, findings based upon the facts, and recommendations. The reports are recommendations to improve efficiency, save money and improve the agency.
Once a report is issued, the investigated agency has 60 days to respond to the recommendations (unless the report is about the Board of Supervisors, which is allowed 90 days to respond). The responses must address each finding or recommendation and are made public. The agency responding must agree or disagree with the Civil Grand Jury Report and give an explanation of its response. Where there are recommendations in the report, the agency must answer in one of three ways: “yes, we agree and we will implement”, “yes, we agree with your recommendation but we can’t implement and here is why”, and “no, we don’t agree with your recommendation and here is why.”
Last year, the Civil Grand Jury undertook the largest observation of the Elections Department it has ever performed. One hundred precincts (16%) were observed on election day and one hundred and twenty-six (20%) were observed in the December runoff. All supervisory districts were represented in the November coverage except the 9th district. The Grand Jury found that overall, the DoE did a competent and effective job in these two elections. Mr. Matthews stated that for a Civil Grand Jury Report, this was raving praise. The Grand Jury’s recommendation included centralizing the department’s operations in one location instead of the six used currently, improving poll worker training, insuring prompt delivery of additional ballots to any location awaiting ballots, increasing use of permanent employees and decreasing use of temporary workers, increasing the secrecy of absentee ballots.
Commissioner Townsend asked if the Civil Grand Jury ever looks for employment discrimination. Mr. Matthews said that the Jury is always on the look out for any possibility of discrimination.
6. DIRECTOR’S REPORT:
Ranked Choice Voting– Public Comments to the SoS’s Voting Systems and Procedures Panel must be submitted by 5:00 pm on July 11, 2003 for the panel’s meeting on July 28, 2003.
Commissioner Schulz asked when the Commission would be able to see what has been submitted by ES&S. Mr. Arntz replied that he expects to get a report on or about July 18.
The Director signed the contract with ES&S on July 1, 2003 and the City Attorney has approved it as to form, however, the contract is not valid because ES&S has not paid its business taxes. The Office of Contract Administration is the last agency to sign and it will not do so until the taxes are paid and there is proof of insurance.
Commissioner Townsend asked the Director what he knew about the completeness of the ES&S application submitted to the SoS.
Mr. Arntz replied that he reported at the Commission’s last meeting that the SoS office told him that the application was incomplete. What was submitted on June 2nd was the procedures for ES&S’s system – not the software, not the hardware for the system. When he contacted the SoS’s office on June 30th to check, the Director was advised that the application was still not complete.
Mr. Arntz stated that the VSP (Voting Systems Panel) must provide a 30-day notice before any meeting that it holds. Since the whole package has just arrived at the SoS, it is just now being reviewed – this is because the SoS will not review a partial application, it must have the entire package before review begins.
Commissioner Shadoian asked if the Director knew when the testing would be done.
Mr. Arntz answered that he didn’t know. The State’s consultant has just finished its technical review of the DoE’s manual process.
President Rosenthal stated that it was her understanding that the SoS knows the urgency of San Francisco’s situation and that the testing will happen quickly.
Commissioner Kenealey asked if there was a mechanical unit that must be approved by the State.
Director Arntz answered that the eagle system must be approved and was submitted to the SoS on June 26. Test ballots will need to be run through that part of the system to assure that it can capture the information correctly for ranked choice voting.
Director Arntz met with Board of Supervisors President Gonzales and Mr. Hill from the Center for Voting and Democracy to discuss the DoE reviewing a purely manual system for RCV. Mr. Arntz sent an email requesting information from a London company called Electorial Reform Services which has information on hand tallying without mechanical systems or computers. The company was suggested by Mr. Hill. This would be a third plan for the DoE to use.
Budget Update – the DoE’s budget has been reviewed twice by the Finance Committee. Currently, the budget for the department stands at $14.8M for the 2003-2004 Fiscal Year. $1.8M is to be used for RCV. The department will increase its efficiency and closely monitor temporary worker’s hours in its effort to stay within budget.
Two vendors being considered for printing the VIPs are being examined. Staff members have visited their plants to determine if they can handle the project.
Poll Locating – reprecincting is being reviewed. Vendors are being considered for the printing of the new maps with the latest precinct information. The procedure manual has been completed.
Training – the staff person responsible for training is also responsible for various election day activities such as organizing street closures and parking – the Department uses 129 vehicles on election day.
Security – the alternative draft plan is 75% completed and will be given to the Commission in a week.
Ballot Distribution – the manager of this division attended the Summer Institute, which is held at Stanford University and attended by elections officials throughout the state. The three-day topic this year was Absentee Voting.
A draft of the ballot for the 92 business owners participating in the Union Square Business District Election has been completed. There will be a board hearing after this election and the participants can decide to change their votes at the hearing. The amount of sidewalk space a business owner has determines the weight of his/her vote. The DoE will be responsible for this calculation and tracking the results.
The division is working to renovate the space at 240 Van Ness Street to receive and hold ballots. The cost is estimated to be over $200,000.
Voter Services – two staff attended the Stanford Summer Institute. Attendees get intensive training in elections laws and procedures on absentee voting.
The number of candidates for the November election has dropped off, several thousand in lieu signatures on petitions are being examined. Each voter who signs and is registered in the district where a candidate is running reduces the candidate’s filing fee by 50 cents.
The Brown Bag Luncheons are continuing. These informational meetings explain the laws, procedures, absentee ballots, and registration campaigns to the candidates and their campaign workers.
The Help America Vote Act will change requirements for voter identification. The SoS is reviewing the new act.
Recall Election – San Francisco has so far received 1,193 signatures. There has been minimal activity in the DoE regarding the campaign.
Commissioner Kenealey asked the Director what is the status of the DoE’s real estate search.
Mr. Arntz replied that he felt the Real Estate Department did not do an in depth review of the department and its peculiar situation. There were places offered, but the amount of square footage was the same as now being used by the DoE at all its separate locations. The DoE needs to expand during election time and this was not taken into consideration by Real Estate. The department was heavily involved in working on its budget at the time Real Estate was doing its search and this timing was a problem. What is needed is more space, near good transit lines, and within a budget that will be acceptable.
Commissioner Townsend asked the Director to explain the new voter identification plan.
The Director explained that it was a federal act for new voters. The incentive to the states will be in the form of federal monies.
Commissioner Shadoian asked how many precincts and how many registered voters are now in the City.
Mr. Arntz replied that there are 550 precincts, including 18 mail ballots precincts, with 439,000 voters.
Election Support Services – this division recruits poll workers and has sent 5000 letters to previous workers. The letters asked if the persons still lived at the addresses on file and asked if the emergency and contact information was still correct. The information is now coming into the DoE and is being recorded.
Technology – the division has completed its response to the second round of questions from the SoS regarding manual tally procedures and software for tabulation of the RCV information. Preparing the system for uploading the new re-precincting information continues to take much of the division’s time. The division is reviewing the ES&S application to the SoS to make sure that the system that ES&S describes is the one we need and expect to ultimately pay for.
Public Comment – Mark Tognotti asked the President if he was correct that she had stated that her primary goals were to insure confidence in the results of the upcoming election, and the integrity of the election itself, with or without the implementation of RCV. Steven Hill said that the SoS now has a working model of the equipment to count RCV and that the federal testing authority has signed off. Charles Kalish addressed whether ES&S has been truthful with the department. Karen Isler encouraged the Commission to support RCV. Steven Willis said that the Director should be in contact with ES&S everyday.
President Rosenthal stated that although the Commission does not usually speak regarding Public Comment, she wanted to assure the audience that Director Arntz is in daily contact with all the entities involved with RCV.
7. New Business
(a) Discussion and possible approval of Elections Commission Minutes for Commission Meeting held on June 18, 2003. This item was TABLED until the next meeting.
(b) Discussion and possible action to approve the Department’s plan for public education and outreach concerning ranked choice voting and awarding grants to nonprofits and other groups to assist with public education and outreach.
Rachael Gosiengfiao, manager of Campaign Services, reported that information provided to the Commission and the audience (as handouts) was an overview. The division had decided to award $10,000 grants to one primary organization in each of the eleven supervisory districts. The primary organizations would be responsible for reaching out to all voters in the district including networking with neighborhood groups and schools to promote and educate about RCV.
Grants will also be awarded to secondary organizations who will partner with the primaries to ensure that special needs in each community are met. Special attention areas identified by the DoE are: Low voter turnout areas, seniors and disabled persons, and limited English speakers (Chinese, Spanish, Russian, Tagalog, Vietnamese). Once the grant applications have been completed, they will be sent to these organizations and community groups. The DoE is in the process of determining how to fairly distribute the grants and how much the grants will be. It is hoped that the amounts will be decided within the next week.
The qualification criteria are: must be a nonprofit-nonpartisan organization, must have 501 (c) 3 status, must demonstrate at least three years experience in community organizing or development, must show proven track record of fostering relationships with other community organizations and constituencies in the community, and must commit to recruit a minimum of 50 Chinese, Spanish and/or Russian bi-lingual poll workers for the upcoming November election.
Commissioner Kenealey MOVED to accept the plan as stated in the overview.
Commissioner Schulz asked whether this was the complete budget for education and outreach.
Ms. Gosiengfiao replied that this was only for the community grants. There are different monies for poll worker training, website, flyers, posters, etc. She said that this money was solely for RCV.
Commissioner Schulz asked if, in Ms. Gosiengfiao’s opinion, one criterion for dispensing grants should be that the agency be publicly supportive of RCV.
President Rosenthal replied that she could not envision a scenario in which the DoE would ask the people who would be implementing the training program for RCV to take a loyalty oath. Further, she said that groups that may have opposed RCV may have more at stake in making sure voters are educated about it.
Commissioner Townsend stated that he had a problem with anyone who wants to participate in City government having to pass a litmus test. He said that the department will look at proposals and what people are committed to do and will make a decision whether those people can do what they say they will.
Public Comment: The following members of the public spoke about this item: Alexi Folger, Lucy Colvin, Sarah Diefendorf, Steve Willis, Brenda Henry, Sally Fune, Eileen Hansen, Steven Hill, and Jonnie Levy.
Commissioner Shadoian asked if there would be a chance for flexibility in the secondary organizations to target some of the areas mentioned in the public comment such as some areas of the City needing more than others.
Ms. Gosiengfiao stated that there was at least $115,000 for the secondary groups and it would be fairly distributed to areas with the most need. This distribution would not be based on supervisory district.
The MOTION to approve FAILED. Vote was three to two.
Commissioner Townsend MOVED that the DoE retool the outreach to include ethnic media, heavier concentration in precincts of low turnout, to give specific attention to 18 to 24 year old voters – recognizing that they all do live in all districts but giving special attention to educating them about RCV.
Director Arntz asked if the Commission could approve the outreach plan with the addition of the items mentioned so that the department would not have to wait two weeks to begin its work. President Rosenthal agreed.
The Outreach Plan is to be amended as follows: Under the first section regarding grant awards, add low voter turn out – with specific attention to African-American communities. Also add voters between 18 and 24 years of age and ethnic media. At the end, under qualification criteria #4, restate to say “organizations must commit to recruit a minimum of fifty poll workers for the upcoming November election particularly Chinese, Russian, Spanish and Tagalog bilingual poll workers where applicable. The Department of Elections will provide stipends for the poll workers. SECONDED.
Public Comment: Jonnie Levy suggested Vietnamese be added and that the DoE get Community input in the decision of which groups get the grants. Steven Hill said an amount should be written in for the secondary groups.
QUESTION was called and the VOTE to passed the Outreach Plan with the amendment and adding “Vietnamese” to the languages, CARRIED unanimously.
8. Old Business
(a) Discussion and possible action to approve an amendment to the Commission Bylaws, Article VII, to create a single standing committee for the Commission. TABLED until the next meeting.
(b) Discussion and possible action to approve an amendment to the Commission Bylaws, Article XI, deleting the word “annals” and inserting instead “annual report,” and providing that the President prepares the annual report, with the approval of the Commission. TABLED until the next meeting.
9. Public Comment: Lucy Colvin said that it was not legal for the department to prepare for a December runoff.
ADJOURNMENT at 9:40 pm.