King County's flawed polling place ballot reconciliation efforts
When King County’s elections office personnel attempted to reconcile ballots cast at polling places and voters credited with voting in the poll books, they made mistakes.
Humans make mistakes, but the ones made in King County weren’t all the result of human fallibility. They also resulted from an apparent absence of a standard procedure for the 20 members of Logan’s “canvassing crew” to follow.
As previously noted, the Bothell Regional Library polling place reconciliation made sense – even though the so-called reconciliation actually involved adjusting the numbers to make it appear that illegitimately cast provisional ballots weren’t a problem.
The Denny Terrace polling place is a good example of how things get messed up when a standard procedure isn’t established and followed.
Because of the errors made in reconciling ballots and voters for Denny Terrace, the reconciliation summary released by King County on March 11 understated the number of provisional ballots inserted into Accuvote machines by two in the “Plus/Minus” column and by seven in the “Adjusted #” column.
Rather than leaving a “Net Difference” of five ballots from unexplained sources, the summary should have shown a so-called balance of zero (“so-called” because the illegitimate ballots in the ballot box were still illegitimate even after their source was deduced).
The five extra ballots were left as an unexplained “net difference” because of errors in preparing the summary, not because their source couldn’t be explained.
A correct report of the situation at Denny Terrace would have increased the admitted total number of provisional ballots unlawfully inserted into the Accuvote machines to 671 rather than 664. (The “Adjusted #” column was totaled in the summary, so the four negative-number adjustments made to explain away shortages of ballots in the boxes cancelled out four of the positive-number adjustments made to account for provisional ballots unlawfully inserted into the Accuvote machines. The net was 660, but the total of provisional ballots put into the machines according to the summary was 664, not 660.)
At Denny Terrace, the ballot accountability sheets and the notes made by the canvassing crew on the poll book cover sheets show that the polling place as a whole had 32 more ballots in the ballot box (via the Accuvote machine) than the number of regular ballots signed for and issued.
All 32 of those extra ballots in the ballot box resulted from the insertion of provisional ballots into the Accuvote machine rather than into signed, sealed, labeled envelopes for validation prior to tabulating the votes on any of them.
Yet, the reconciliation notes in the “big binder” and in the reconciliation summary released by King County on March 11, 2005, do not show the facts. Instead, the binder notes show 24 extra ballots in the ballot box, rather than the 32 which were actually there; and the summary shows 30 extra ballots rather than 32. Also, the “adjusted #” in the summary is only 25 even though there were more than enough missing (“no label”) provisional ballots to explain all 32 extra ballots.
For the precincts voting at Denny Terrace, the numbers which should have appeared for each precinct in the canvassing crew’s binder are as follows:
SEA 43-2541 – Extra ballots “+13”, not “+7”;
SEA 43-2545 – Extra ballots “+2” as stated;
SEA 43-2546 – Extra ballots “0” as stated;
SEA 43-2547 – Extra ballots “+11”, not “+9”;
SEA 43-2548 – Extra ballots “+1” as stated;
SEA 43-2549 – Extra ballots “+5” as stated;
SEA 43-2852 – Extra ballots “0” as stated; and
Total – Extra ballots “32” not 24 as would have been stated had the sum been written in the binder’s notes.
In the reconciliation summary, the binder’s figures for extra ballots weren’t accurately transcribed:
SEA 43-2541 – Extra ballots was stated as “13” (which was correct) rather than the binder’s “7”;
SEA 43-2545 – Extra ballots was stated as “1” rather than the binder’s “2”;
SEA 43-2547 – the number was stated as “12” rather than the binder’s “9” or the correct 11;
SEA 43-2548 – the number was stated as “0” rather than the binder’s “1”;
SEA 43-2549 – the number was stated as “4” rather than the binder’s “5”; and
Total – the total was stated to be “30” rather than the binder’s 24 or the correct 32.
The “Adjusted #” column in the reconciliation summary should have shown numbers for each precinct that cancelled out all 32 of the extra ballots in the count. An apparent “crossover error” occurred in precincts SEA 43-2547 and -2548. There were 12 missing “no label” provisional ballots in -2547, but only 11 extra ballots in the count. The other missing provisional ballot was apparently mistakenly issued from the stack of ballots for precinct -2548, making it appear that -2548 had an extra ballot in the count even though it had no missing “no label” provisional ballots to explain that extra ballot. That’s the only complicated part of deducing where all 32 extra ballots in the ballot box came from.
Oddly, the canvassing crew "zeroed out" the election day Accuvote tabulation for the Denny Terrace polling place and hand counted the ballots to be sure of the correct count -- but the new ballot numbers that resulted from this hand count weren't incorporated into the reconciliation summary. The failure to correct the ballot counts for each precinct was perhaps the reason why the crossover error in the two precincts noted above wasn't recognized while preparing the summary. (Either that, or the totally confused "+/-" numbers in the binder's notes left the people preparing the summary unable to make any sense at all of this polling place. Those "+/-" numbers should have reflected the numbers of extra ballots or missing ballots, if the canvassing crew member who made the notes followed the same procedure as the member who did the Bothell Regional Library polling place reconciliation. They didn't, so preparing a summary from a non-standardized bunch of notes was difficult, to put it mildly.)
For those keeping up with the numbers of “voterless ballots” evidenced by the absence of enough names on the list voters credited with voting, the “WANDA” numbers written on the poll book cover sheets by the canvassing crew show that the scanning of bar codes next to signatures in the poll books skipped seven. The Denny Terrace polling place ought to show up as having 32+7=39 too few voters credited with voting to account for all the ballots included in the vote tabulation.
(A "hat tip" and thank you to Stefan Sharkansky of Sound Politics for providing images of the ballot accountability sheets and poll book cover sheets needed to figure out the Denny Terrace polling place "reconciliation.")
Humans make mistakes, but the ones made in King County weren’t all the result of human fallibility. They also resulted from an apparent absence of a standard procedure for the 20 members of Logan’s “canvassing crew” to follow.
As previously noted, the Bothell Regional Library polling place reconciliation made sense – even though the so-called reconciliation actually involved adjusting the numbers to make it appear that illegitimately cast provisional ballots weren’t a problem.
The Denny Terrace polling place is a good example of how things get messed up when a standard procedure isn’t established and followed.
Because of the errors made in reconciling ballots and voters for Denny Terrace, the reconciliation summary released by King County on March 11 understated the number of provisional ballots inserted into Accuvote machines by two in the “Plus/Minus” column and by seven in the “Adjusted #” column.
Rather than leaving a “Net Difference” of five ballots from unexplained sources, the summary should have shown a so-called balance of zero (“so-called” because the illegitimate ballots in the ballot box were still illegitimate even after their source was deduced).
The five extra ballots were left as an unexplained “net difference” because of errors in preparing the summary, not because their source couldn’t be explained.
A correct report of the situation at Denny Terrace would have increased the admitted total number of provisional ballots unlawfully inserted into the Accuvote machines to 671 rather than 664. (The “Adjusted #” column was totaled in the summary, so the four negative-number adjustments made to explain away shortages of ballots in the boxes cancelled out four of the positive-number adjustments made to account for provisional ballots unlawfully inserted into the Accuvote machines. The net was 660, but the total of provisional ballots put into the machines according to the summary was 664, not 660.)
At Denny Terrace, the ballot accountability sheets and the notes made by the canvassing crew on the poll book cover sheets show that the polling place as a whole had 32 more ballots in the ballot box (via the Accuvote machine) than the number of regular ballots signed for and issued.
All 32 of those extra ballots in the ballot box resulted from the insertion of provisional ballots into the Accuvote machine rather than into signed, sealed, labeled envelopes for validation prior to tabulating the votes on any of them.
Yet, the reconciliation notes in the “big binder” and in the reconciliation summary released by King County on March 11, 2005, do not show the facts. Instead, the binder notes show 24 extra ballots in the ballot box, rather than the 32 which were actually there; and the summary shows 30 extra ballots rather than 32. Also, the “adjusted #” in the summary is only 25 even though there were more than enough missing (“no label”) provisional ballots to explain all 32 extra ballots.
For the precincts voting at Denny Terrace, the numbers which should have appeared for each precinct in the canvassing crew’s binder are as follows:
SEA 43-2541 – Extra ballots “+13”, not “+7”;
SEA 43-2545 – Extra ballots “+2” as stated;
SEA 43-2546 – Extra ballots “0” as stated;
SEA 43-2547 – Extra ballots “+11”, not “+9”;
SEA 43-2548 – Extra ballots “+1” as stated;
SEA 43-2549 – Extra ballots “+5” as stated;
SEA 43-2852 – Extra ballots “0” as stated; and
Total – Extra ballots “32” not 24 as would have been stated had the sum been written in the binder’s notes.
In the reconciliation summary, the binder’s figures for extra ballots weren’t accurately transcribed:
SEA 43-2541 – Extra ballots was stated as “13” (which was correct) rather than the binder’s “7”;
SEA 43-2545 – Extra ballots was stated as “1” rather than the binder’s “2”;
SEA 43-2547 – the number was stated as “12” rather than the binder’s “9” or the correct 11;
SEA 43-2548 – the number was stated as “0” rather than the binder’s “1”;
SEA 43-2549 – the number was stated as “4” rather than the binder’s “5”; and
Total – the total was stated to be “30” rather than the binder’s 24 or the correct 32.
The “Adjusted #” column in the reconciliation summary should have shown numbers for each precinct that cancelled out all 32 of the extra ballots in the count. An apparent “crossover error” occurred in precincts SEA 43-2547 and -2548. There were 12 missing “no label” provisional ballots in -2547, but only 11 extra ballots in the count. The other missing provisional ballot was apparently mistakenly issued from the stack of ballots for precinct -2548, making it appear that -2548 had an extra ballot in the count even though it had no missing “no label” provisional ballots to explain that extra ballot. That’s the only complicated part of deducing where all 32 extra ballots in the ballot box came from.
Oddly, the canvassing crew "zeroed out" the election day Accuvote tabulation for the Denny Terrace polling place and hand counted the ballots to be sure of the correct count -- but the new ballot numbers that resulted from this hand count weren't incorporated into the reconciliation summary. The failure to correct the ballot counts for each precinct was perhaps the reason why the crossover error in the two precincts noted above wasn't recognized while preparing the summary. (Either that, or the totally confused "+/-" numbers in the binder's notes left the people preparing the summary unable to make any sense at all of this polling place. Those "+/-" numbers should have reflected the numbers of extra ballots or missing ballots, if the canvassing crew member who made the notes followed the same procedure as the member who did the Bothell Regional Library polling place reconciliation. They didn't, so preparing a summary from a non-standardized bunch of notes was difficult, to put it mildly.)
For those keeping up with the numbers of “voterless ballots” evidenced by the absence of enough names on the list voters credited with voting, the “WANDA” numbers written on the poll book cover sheets by the canvassing crew show that the scanning of bar codes next to signatures in the poll books skipped seven. The Denny Terrace polling place ought to show up as having 32+7=39 too few voters credited with voting to account for all the ballots included in the vote tabulation.
(A "hat tip" and thank you to Stefan Sharkansky of Sound Politics for providing images of the ballot accountability sheets and poll book cover sheets needed to figure out the Denny Terrace polling place "reconciliation.")
posted by Micajah | 12:15 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home