2004 Ballot Recount: Observer Report

• December 15, 2004:
  Preliminary Report by Green Party Observer 2
• December 14, 2004:
  Report by Green Party Observer 1

December 15, 2004:
Preliminary Report by Green Party Observer 2

Coshocton count finished. Once again, ballot security is an issue. Boxes were open prior to our arrival. They are kept unsealed in a locked room at the Board of Elections. Results were a 47 vote swing to Kerry. Discrepencies were resolved. Board cooperative.

December 14, 2004:
Report by Green Party Observer 1

[Note: This is a recount report from Coshocton County, Ohio, which describes how vote totals were distributed to witnesses with the apparent intention of misleading them.]

The recount of the ballot cast for President on November 2, 2004, at the Coshocton County BOE began at approximately 10:15 am, December 14, 2004. There were nine witnesses present to represent David Cobb. There were four witnesses present to represent the Democratic candidate. There were no witnesses present to represent the Republican candidate.

There were board members present, both Republican and Democrat, and others whose identity or relationship to board affairs was unclear. All were observed handling ballots for distribution and therefore would be disqualified as witnesses. Their exact role in the recount was not clear. The counters were unpaid volunteers, one Democrat and one Republican per counting unit.

Eight counting units initially began the count with the ninth starting after approximately twenty minutes. One Cobb witness was in place at each counting station.

At the initiation of the count, the ballots were not sealed or secured in any manner beyond the safekeeping offered by the BOE office itself. The ballots were distributed to the counting stations prior to the presence of the witnesses.

The ballots were temporarily/permanently stored in a locked room within the BOE office, with a key to the room being held by each, the Republican and the Democrat BOE employee. The ballots appeared to be stored in cardboard boxes, unsealed, with more than one precinct per box. Signature books were stored in a steel cabinet in the area where the count took place.

Coshocton County uses an optical scan ballot. The presidential candidates' position rotates on the ballot from precinct to precinct in order to provide fair position placement. A full hand count of all county precincts was chosen by the BOE for the recount. Optical scan ballots are well suited to hand counting, due to the bold print on the black and white ballot, as well as the bold mark required to indicate a vote. It was the perspective of the nine witnesses that the count proceeded in an equitable manner, with disputes concerning voter intent being resolved in a fair outcome.

Some issues were raised during the hand count that warrant mention. The failure of the board to allow witness presence prior to the handling of the ballots. BOE personnel (employee/member) alluded to the counting of some precincts prior to the start of the recount. Witness, Patricia Stout, stated that "one of the precincts I observed was already separated into Republicans, Democrats and Other. It was clear that this pile had been counted." The count was completed and totals reflected a net loss of 13 votes for George W. Bush, and a net gain of 34 votes for John Kerry. The hand count totals were compared to totals furnished by the BOE dated/generated 12/10/04.

Signature book examination conducted by the witnesses for the Democratic candidate looked at two different precincts, with BOE personnel recounting Jefferson Twp. Precinct. Discrepancy appeared to indicate a pattern of a 7-8% loss of votes for the Democratic candidate. Continued review and examination was thorough and resulted in some contentious debate centered around the degree of scrutiny.

Coshocton County BOE employees were generally helpful and demonstrated a desire for a full and fair recount. Some board members present clearly resented the witness presence, and voiced their resentment. At no time were any members/employees abusive or harassing. One observation by Witness J. was that at one point there were two Republican counters at a counting unit. "They appeared to complete their count accurately."

Witness B. noted that resentment about the recount was expressed by a small number of counters, including the assessment that the recount was a "waste of time." She also observed there were five blank ballots included in the ballots marked Precinct 2A.

Earlier in this report I mentioned that the hand count totals were compared to totals furnished by the BOE dated/generated(?) 12/10/2004. These totals were incorporated into a three-page list indicating vote totals precinct by precinct. These vote totals were distributed to witnesses in a manner that suggested they were the totals certified by Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell, on December 6, 2004. They were in fact not the totals certified by Secretary of State Blackwell. The lists provided to witnesses are noted to be "Official Nov. 2, 2004" and are dated 12/10/2004 10:25:28am. These include pages 1, 2, 3, of 96.

On December 8, 2004, I contacted the Coshocton County BOE to verify that they had received their letter indicating the request for a recount from Presidential candidate David Cobb, and that they had scheduled a day and time for the recount to take place. I was informed that the recount was scheduled for Tuesday December 14th, and that there would be ten counting units used. I was also informed that a 3% hand count of the total presidential vote would be initiated. The ballots would then be tabulated using the optical scan equipment in the BOE office. If no discrepancy occurred between the hand count and the tabulation by the optical scan, then the remaining ballots in the county would be optically scanned. And the totals would constitute the totals of the recount. If discrepancy occurred then the entire county would be hand-counted.

On December 10th, I again contacted the Coshocton BOE with some procedural questions concerning the recount. I first inquired as to the date and time and was told at that time a full hand-count of the county would be used to recount the ballots. Ten counting units were to be employed. I was at that time encouraged that the BOE would employ a full hand-count.

On December 13th, I again contacted the BOE to confirm the Dec. 14th date, and 10 am time. The BOE employee confirmed the day and time and informed me that they weren't going to "provide you people with lunch!" Fair enough. I was also informed that there would only be eight counting units as they were having difficulty getting volunteers to count. The Coshocton County BOE counters were all unpaid volunteers.

The recount proceeded as outlined above.

A continued analysis of days, times, vote totals and BOE procedures have revealed a number of contradictory and conflicting observations, as well as a host of questions.

A Chronology

• November 3
  Unofficial Vote Totals for November 2, 2004 Presidential Election Coshocton County, Nov. 3, 04:
  Badnarik 17
  Bush 9,121
  Cobb 0
  Duncan 0
  Harris 0
  Kerry 6,763
  Parker 0
  Peroutka 65
  Schriner 0
  Zych 0
  Total 15,966
• November 3-4
  November 3rd, I called the Coshocton BOE, they were closed. I emailed the BOE through the SOS website to express my concern that I saw no vote recorded for David Cobb. I had voted for write-in candidate Cobb. On November 4th I received an email reply that all write-in votes were sent to the SOS. An additional email quickly followed that acknowledged one vote for Cobb in Coshocton County.
• November 19
  On November 19th an article in the Coshocton Tribune newspaper reported the official total vote for President in Coshocton County was 16,240 with the candidates' vote totals published at the online newspaper as follows:
  Bush 9,277
  Kerry 6,878
  Peroutka 67
  Badnarik 17
  Cobb 1
  All other write-in candidates received no votes.
• December 6
  Coshocton County Official Presidential vote totals as certified by Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell 12/06/04:
  Bush 9,277
  Kerry 6,878
  Peroutka 67
  Badnarik 17
  Schriner 2
  Cobb 1
  Total Presidential Vote in Coshocton County 16,242
  All other write-in candidates received no votes.
• December 14
  Coshocton County Presidential vote totals as distributed to witnesses during the recount of the Presidential vote in Coshocton County on 12/14/04. This document had the heading "Official-Nov. 2, 2004," dated 12/10/2004 10:25:28 AM and included pages 1-3 of 96 pages:
  Bush 9,839
  Kerry 7,378
  Peroutka 68
  Badnarik 15
  Schriner 2
  Cobb 1
  Total Presidential Vote in Coshocton County 17,300
• December 14
  Coshocton County Presidential vote totals at completion of hand recount 12/14/04. These totals to be certified as the official vote:
  Total Presidential Vote in Coshocton County 17,322
  Bush 9,826
  Kerry 7412
  Peroutka 68
  Badnarik 13
  Schriner 2
  Cobb 1
• Discrepancy between official vote totals as certified by Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell and vote totals determined by the hand recount of all Presidential votes cast in Coshocton County:
  Bush 549
  Kerry 534
  Peroutka
  Badnarik 4
  Schriner 0
  Cobb 0

Questions and concerns:

• Security of the ballots.
  Ballots are stored in partially opened boxes, unsealed at the time of observation and apparently were never sealed. Ballots stored in room at BOE. BOE employees and board members stated that each employee had a key. It required both keys to gain access. I vigorously questioned the security procedures in use and was promptly accused by board members of questioning the honesty and integrity of the board employees. Witnesses participating in recounts at other BOE's within the region are observing some very stringent security procedures including locked and sealed containers, participation by the sheriff's department whenever ballots are handled, or ballot containers are opened for access. Inadequate security procedures employed by BOE's are an invitation to both accidental and willful misdeeds. Blank, unused ballots mixed in with precinct vote. These are unsecured, blank votes. Once again a dangerous practice and security concern.
• Vote totals and timing.
  I seriously question the intent of the BOE in distributing vote totals in a manner that suggested they were the official vote totals certified by the SOS. The documents were clearly labeled "Official Nov. 2, 2004." It is my contention that these vote totals were generated in the period following the Dec. 6th certification and the Dec 14th date of the presidential recount. When asked to run a test stack of ballots as well as a precinct that had been hand recounted, the BOE readily complied. While running the ballots through the optical scan tabulating equipment, I observed and examined a computer print-out sheet indicating that the machine was used to scan ballots, the nature and designation not determined, on December 10, 2004. I expect to have access to copies of those print outs available to me in the very near future for further examination. This observation, along with vote total document dated 12/10/04 leads me to believe that the vote totals included on the document headed "Official-Nov. 2, 2004" were possibly generated on 12/10/04.

The motives for the procedures and events outlined above are at this time unknown. They are however, cause for serious concern. Why were vote totals distributed to witnesses with the apparent intention of misleading them? If ballots were tabulated on December 10, 2004, four days after certification by SOS, and four days prior to a scheduled pending recount, why?

Coincidently, December 10th was the date I contacted the BOE and was told that they would now be conducting a full hand recount of all the county's precincts. Were ballots, left unsecured and unsealed, handled by board members/employees in the interim period following the certification and the recount? Witness Patricia Stout stated that a board employee informed her that "a few precincts" had been already counted prior to the start of the recount, not in the presence of witnesses. Why, when?

Did the Coshocton County BOE submit the vote totals on the document headed "Official-Nov. 2, 2004" to the SOS and they were misreported there. If they did, when?

Were votes "padded" into the count at some time during the interim period of Dec.6th - Dec. 14th? A thorough poll and signature book examination could easily answer that question, and I doubt that that is the case.

Were votes misplaced or lost in storage prior to the certification of the Coshocton County vote, and later reinserted into the tabulations to rectify the error?

Were "friendlier" vote totals generated prior to the recount to lessen the brunt of public reaction should a large discrepancy be discovered through a recount? Was the vote recounted at the BOE prior to the Dec. 14th official recount in order to get a "feel" for the accuracy of the official count, and then discovered to have a count discrepancy, therefore inducing the BOE to go to a full hand count immediately?

Recount procedure, as outlined by SOS Blackwell, states that an initial hand recount of 3% of the total presidential ballot cast would then be followed by machine tabulation of those same votes. This portion of the procedure allows for examination and observation of the tabulating equipment.

A direct move to a full hand-recount subverts that procedure [i.e., testing the machines]

Was that procedure [i.e., moving directly to full hand count, with no machine tast] an attempt to divert attention from possibly malfunctioning tabulating equipment? When request was made of BOE employee to conduct optical scanning of both test and actual precinct ballots, the request was fully and immediately complied with.

The actual hand recount of the ballots went unexpectedly well. Such basic technology was very compatible to a small number of ballots. The witnesses felt that an accurate count was achieved. One must note that it is very difficult to work in a non-partisan manner in an obviously partisan atmosphere. Board employees worked very hard to manage the recount and all the requests made of them by witnesses. Unfortunately their job was made much harder by some board members who vigorously disagreed when BOE employees sought to work co-operatively with witnesses, and subjected them to protests meant to dissuade them from complying with witness's requests.