Elections Commission
2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002
City and County of San Francisco
Elections Commission
Approved: 10-19-05
Minutes of the Meeting at City Hall Room 408
September 21, 2005
1. CALL TO ORDER. President Matthews called the meeting to order at 7:10 pm.
2. ROLL CALL. PRESENT: Commissioners, Gerard Gleason, Michael Mendelson, Sheila Chung, and Richard P. Matthews. EXCUSED: Commissioners Arnold Townsend and Eric Safire.
3. Public Comments: Micheas Herman spoke about his observations while serving on the Elections Observer Panel and requested that members be allowed closer proximity to the process, Alec Bash said that he is committed to supporting voting systems which ensure that every vote is counted accurately, Jim Soper said he hoped that there would be a monitor for observers to see the tabulating computer on election day, Roger Donaldson said he hoped there would be review of the RFP (Request for Proposal) for the new voting equipment and that the Commission consider “open voting standards and systems” for a future agenda, Steve Noetzel commented on what he called a “crisis in confidence” that voters are experiencing, and Chris Jerdonek voiced his concern that the equipment for the 2006 November election would not be ready for ranked choice voting (RCV).
4. DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Ballot Distribution – The division has received all ballots except precinct and precinct generic cards. The locations at 240 Van Ness (to store the ballots), Brooks Hall (where the absentee ballots are staged), and Pier 29 (which receives all the election materials on Election night) are being readied.
Budget / Personnel – The division has been hiring temporary staff for the upcoming election, and continues processing invoices and requisitions for materials ordered for the election. An 1657 Accountant position has been posted and recruitment has begun. The deadline for applications is October 7, and interviews will begin shortly after that date.
Campaign Services – The division has been filing FPPC forms (Fair Political Practices Campaign), updating the manual, setting up computers and phones for the Phone Bank. Staff is also updating the Observer Manuals.
Outreach – The division has approved proofs for the printing of the RCV city-wide, tri-lingual postcard that includes an image of the RCV ballot and information regarding RCV, and how to contact the Department if people have questions. This mailer will be sent to all San Francisco county registered voters in October. Staff has completed the draft of the ex-offender brochure and it is currently being reviewed by Public Defender Jeff Adachi. There is a calendar on the Elections Department website of the locations for community presentations.
Poll Locating/ADA – This division has been contacting the property owners at previous poll locations who have not responded to our requests to use their sites again. Staff are surveying the city for new sites. It should be mentioned that while they look for new sites, ADA accessibility to these sites is of paramount concern. The division is creating maps to determine bi-lingual poll worker placements, driving directions to the sites, etc. The maps will be on the Department website.
Publications – The ballot design is completed and printed, the precinct cards will be arriving in two weeks and will be stored, the VIP (Voter’s Information Pamphlet) is almost complete and is going through a final format and review and is expected to be in the mail, along with absentee ballots by October 11.
Technology Division – The division has lost its data base designer and the process to replace her has begun. Computers for new temporary staff are being set up. The first of the three registration reports required by the Secretary of State (SOS) has been sent.
Voter Services Division – The division has mailed ballots to overseas voters. These ballots are not the actual cardstock ballots voters in San Francisco will be using, but are 11” X 17” paper ones. When they are returned, staff will transfer the votes onto cardstock ballots. This is a very time consuming process.
Procedures Manual – This two-years-in-the-making manual still needs some attachments, but is mostly complete. The delay in completion was due to the department’s implementation of RCV.
Proposition 77 (redistricting) – This is a state measure to allow a panel of retired judges to re-draw district lines for the Board of Equalization, the Senate, Assembly and Controller’s Office. If these lines were redrawn in a manner that would require the DoE to move precinct lines, there would be a tremendous effect on the City’s budget because additional staff would need to be hired to redraw these lines. Once the borders are determined, staff would need to drive throughout the City to make certain that the numbers of registered voters in the new precincts match what is listed in DoE records and if not, remake the necessary corrections. The type of ballot for a precinct might also change, as would the DoE’s database, forms and maps. There would need to be Outreach to inform voters. This Proposition would have a huge impact on the Department’s staffing and budget. The new lines would have to be implemented before next June’s primary. In order to do this, the lines would have to be finalized by the end of this December – to have lines completed that quickly is unprecedented.
Update of the process for selection of new voting system – A second addendum to the RFP was issued. It will extend the time for the vendors to submit their supplemental proposals by one week. Proposals are now due September 30th. The review period has been extended until October 14th.
Commissioner Chung asked if the RFP vendors currently have to show that they can meet the deadlines for certification. Director Arntz responded affirmatively.
Commissioner Chung asked what information becomes public once a contract is awarded. Deputy City Attorney Julia Moll stated that some of the information submitted is proprietary and that she could provide additional information on what is available and what is not as well and the time frame for this information at a future meeting.
Commissioner Gleason asked if the Commission could get a calendar of dates for the steps of the certification process. Director Arntz agreed to provide a calendar of the time frames.
Commissioner Mendelson asked what is the time frame to get the SOS to certify the system. Mr. Arntz explained that this depends on the system – whether it is an all new one or if it is a portion of an existing one. He said that an all-new one could take up to six months to get certification.
Commissioner Mendelson asked if the certification would be provisional. Director Arntz said that he doesn’t know the answer. He added that the existing certification held by ES&S (Election Systems and Software) is a conditional certification.
Commissioner Mendelson asked if the Director was aware of any recognition, on the federal level, of RCV. Mr. Arntz said that there has been nothing substantial enough to have been brought to his attention.
Public Comment. Jim Soper asked when the decision on the voting machines would be announced and if the Commission had the responsibility to approve the selection of the equipment. Jennifer Hammond spoke about voter confidence in voting equipment. Karen Ulring said she was concerned with the security issues of the equipment. Chris Bowman said he hopes the VIPs will be in the hands of the voters when their absentee ballots arrive. George Scott Blume reported that he tried all the systems in the recent mock election and prefers the current system. Deborah Kearns said that she and her family and friends are concerned that their votes will be counted. Roger Donaldson voiced his appreciation that the Commission is listening to everyone’s concerns. Will Carsten said he wanted to impress upon the Commission the importance of security.
Director Arntz assured the audience and the Commission that San Francisco will still be a “paper-based’ voting county.
5. Commissioners' Reports. President Matthews reported that he had a discussion with a representative of PRI (Public Research Institute) at San Francisco State University who will be doing a “significant” exit poll at the November election, in which they will be including questions from the Department of Elections and its Commission regarding the VIP and opinions regarding an all-postal ballot. Director Arntz added that the survey is an important opportunity for the Department to work with a research institute.
President Matthews said that last week there was a further analysis of the exit poll of the voters’ experiences with RCV in last November’s election. This report is available on line.
Director Arntz acknowledged a letter he received from Public Defender Adachi commending the Department and Commissioner Safire for their work on the ex-offender voting program. Mr. Arntz said he wanted to recognize Commissioner Arnold Townsend for being the impetus to the program and Charles MacNulty and Deborah Brown who are members of the DoE’s staff who have worked to see this program materialize. He said it was Commissioner Townsend’s poignant story about knowing someone who had been out of prison for 25 years, who didn’t know his right to vote was restored, and therefore had never voted that brought the importance of this to his attention.
6. Presentation by the Director of Elections. President Matthews gave the audience a brief review of the year-long process that the Department accomplishes prior to elections covered by Director Arntz at the previous two Elections Commission meetings and explained that the following report continues this series.
(a) Operations from Election Day to certification of election results. Director John Arntz explained that the DoE has 28 days following election day to complete the “canvas” which certifies the election. All materials sent to voters and returned by the voters is matched in the canvas, a manual count of the votes in random precincts is compared to the electronic results from those precincts. Voter Services checks the absentee and provisional ballots of precincts and compares signatures with the data bank. Campaign Services conducts tours for the Election Observer Panel. Poll Locating makes sure that the inventory of equipment sent to polling places is returned. Budget and Personnel lays off the approximately 200 temporary staff hired to work the election, arranges payment for the 3000 poll workers and payments to the owners of the poll locations. Technology is involved in the daily reports of election results and removal of equipment that was set up for the temporary staff. Ballot Distribution conducts the canvas in Brooks Hall, reviews the rosters, i.e. checking signatures, and conducts the one percent random tally in which seven to eight precincts are hand counted and compared to the electronic count for those precincts.
(b) Process for testing and certification of new voting system. Director John Arntz explained that there are two steps in the testing and certification process. One is at the federal level and is organized by the Federal Elections Commission. The one at the state level is organized by the Secretary of State’s Office (SOS). If a vendor wants to use a system in San Francisco, that vendor must write a program for their equipment and submit the software, not the equipment, to the federal level. An independent lab, under the authority of the Federal Elections Commission, checks for a “malicious code”, that is they check to determine if there are ways to manipulate the information from the equipment proposed. The federal commission then passes or fails the program. The vendor must submit a complete application to the SOS. This application will include the federal testing report, the equipment, procedures for the system, software, and ballot layout. Then the SOS determines if the application is complete. Next, the SOS will test the system in a mock election in San Francisco. This is what was done last year with ES&S’s RCV system. The SOS staff writes and report after the testing and then holds a public hearing. After the hearing, the Voting Systems and Procedures Panel will decide if the system is certified.
7. New Business
(a) Discussion and possible action to approve the minutes fo rthe Commission meeting of August 17, 2005. Commissioner Mendelson MOVED and Commissioner Gleason SECONDED the approval of the minutes. Motion CARRIED unanimously.
(b) Discussion and possible action to formulate Commission goals and objectives to assist the Department of Elections during the next twelve months. President Matthews suggested that the Commission focus on ways to streamline the Voters’ Information Pamphlet (VIP) and make it more cost-effective. He suggested that the DoE’s budget be more prioritized in the “mindscape” of the Board of Supervisors and the Mayor’s Office. President Matthews reminded the Commission that the Department has held seven well-run elections since the Commission was formed and in order to continue this record, the budgeting priorities of the Board and Mayor need to change. He said the Commission should support the Department’s budget over the next twelve months. Director Arntz agreed and said that the Department’s status with the Board and Mayor needs to be raised in the budgeting process. Director Arntz said that he was very open to discussions with the Commission about how to succeed in obtaining more funding for the Department’s very important needs.
Commissioner Gleason reminded the Commission that there had been talks early in the infancy of the Commission about finding a location with adequate space for the Department, and suggested that the topic be pursued again.
Commissioner Mendelson said that the Commission had determined, when it began, that the Department needed space, staffing, and structure. He congratulated the Director for providing the structure that was needed. The Commissioner asked that space and staffing now be made a priority. Commissioner Mendelson suggested that there may need to be a Charter Amendment for special handling of the Elections Department to separate it from other departments during the budget process where automatic across-the-board cuts are made of those departments budgets at the onset of budget negotiations.
Commissioner Chung suggested that the Commission be more involved in providing education to the voter regarding what security measures the DoE is taking and the Commission should look at more creative ways to conduct outreach.
Public Comment. Steven Day suggested that the DoE include a line item in its budget that will include “open source code”.
8. Discussion regarding items for future agendas. Commissioner Mendelson suggested that the documents from the recent Commission Retreat be bound. He asked if there is a list of community-based or non-profit organizations that could assist the DoE in outreach. President Matthews suggested that this might be on a future agenda. Commissioner Gleason suggested an open forum about whether the public is served when the voting systems used are in the hands of private, for-profit, competing entities and discuss other models the City could seek (to be calendared after this November). He clarified that his impetus for discussing this topic was not the current RFP or the existing contract, but about the future. Commissioner Gleason suggested that this discussion might best be handled in Committee. President Matthews suggested that the topic might be discussed in a special hearing at some point. Commissioner Chung suggested that the role of Commissioners on Election Day be an agenda item.
Public Comment. Jim Soper complimented Commissioner Gleason on his suggestion of a public hearing and he suggested discussion regarding what triggers a recount. Sherrie Healy suggested that the Commission discuss the insufficiency of Election Code 15360 (safeguard of 1% manual recount), and said this may not be sufficient to reveal fraud.
9. Public Comment on any issue within the Elections Commission’s general jurisdiction. Roger Silvers said he was a “security professional” and did not have confidence in the ES&S and Sequoia systems vendors.
Commissioner Michael Mendelson left the meeting at 8:30 pm.
The President called for a very brief recess at 8:30pm.
Meeting was called to order at 8:33 pm. The President announced that the Commission had lost its quorum but would continue to hear public comment.
Public Comment continued. A speaker said that he hoped that ample space for observers at any new Election Department site would be a top priority. Alec Bash presented a dvd regarding voting fraud, and comments from computer scientists to the Commission. George Scott Blume said that evaluation of the voting machines needs to consider all voters’ accessibility as well and those with disabilities. Jay Martin said that he felt it was very appropriate for the public to have the opportunity to ask the Director or the Commissioners questions after a report is given at the Commission meetings. Dagmar Zakin asked how the Department was to handle centralized voter registration. Chris Bowman said he was concerned that there was less than a quorum of Commissioners currently, and asked that the attendance records of current Commissioners be published so that the appointing authorities know how their appointees are doing, and asked the Commission to endorse Supervisor Sean Elsbernd’s legislation regarding prioritization of official arguments in the VIP. Steven Day said that he participated in the mock election and felt confident with the automark system.
10. Announcements. Commissioner Gleason asked that Commissioners consider serving as poll inspectors, clerks or operators on the phone bank during the upcoming election.
ADJOURNMENT at 8:50 pm.