2004 Ballot Recount: Observer Report

• December 13, 2004:
  Report by Green Party Regional Coordinator
• December 13, 2004:
  Report by Green Party Observer

December 13, 2004: Report by Green Party Regional Coordinator

Regional Coordinator: R.
County Coordinator: K.

1. The precincts to recount were not chosen randomly. According to Mr. Thomas E. Wolfe, Chairman of the Medina County Board of Elections, "I took two Medina precincts because I knew they had a high vote." "I could have taken five precincts, but then we'd be counting for another hour." "Brunswick Hills A was the first with enough votes to get to 3%" after the two Medina precincts were chosen.
2. Witnesses were not allowed to review the selection and preparation of the ballots to test the voting machines, nor did we have an opportunity to examine them, either before or after they were used to test the machines. We did not see the testing of the machines.
3. Two ballots in Medina City 4F each had one vote on position 9, which was between position 8, a vote for George Bush, and position 10, a vote for John Kerry. These were separated from the votes for other candidates, but we were not allowed to examine them at the end of the process, or at any other time, to see whether other votes on that ballot might also be offset by one position, thus allowing us to ascertain the intent of the voter, and these ballots were not saved for Mr. Wolfe to examine, though I requested that they be saved for Mr. Wolfe.
4. Two ballots in Medina City 4F had votes in both position 8 and position 9. Those ballots were not rejected as overvotes, but were counted as votes for George Bush (position 8). I was refused time to examine these ballots in order to ascertain positions of other votes, and these ballots were not saved for Mr. Wolfe to examine.
5. According to Mr. Wolfe, in Medina City 3F, "Two girls with styrofoam and punchers were sent out to the line because the lines were so long." Some votes were offset from the correct voting positions.
6. In Medina City 3F, a ballot with a vote on 11 that did not correspond to any candidate's position also showed every other vote to be offset by one, thus making the intent of the voter clear, but this ballot was rejected according to Al Junke.
   BOE Director Susan Strasser, BOE Chair Thomas E. Wolfe, and NE Ohio Field Representative for the Secretary of State, Madhu Singh all refused to allow further inspection of the ballots from Medina City that I requested to view in more detail. They stated that our purpose was to decide how the computer would count the vote, and not to determine the intent of the voter.
7. Other problems with the voting process in Medina:
   In Medina City 1B, where there were long lines, the police were standing outside all day, walking up and down the line, looking at people, and looking at cars according to Al Junke.

December 13, 2004:
Report by Green Party Observer

The Green-Libertarian recount in Medina was done on Monday at the Medina Board of Election [BoE]. The results did not change in the 3% hand recount, so they did not count the other 97% by hand.

100% was counted by machine, and any changes should be posted soon.

Tom Wolfe, Democratic Board Member, directed the recount. It was apparent to everyone in the room that Tom Wolfe and the other board members were more concerned about getting the 3% hand recount done without any change in the tally [any change would allow for 100% hand recount of the County] than in having a fair investigation of the vote in Medina County.

Shame on the BoE and Tom Wolfe for being more concerned about "being right" and avoiding work than in conducting a fair inquiry into the voting in Medina County.

We are disappointed in how Tom Wolfe selected the precincts for the 3% hand count. He was aware of several "problem" precincts, that we had identified, but instead selected two precincts in Medina that were part of the Medina School Levy recount last Monday.

That meant that those ballots had been out of the double lock situation and were handled several times since Monday. We believe that Tom Wolfe should have selected precincts that were not subjected to such handling.

We also believe that Tom Wolfe should have selected precincts that showed anomalies. We identified one precinct that had 37 ballots without a recorded vote for president [6.2%]. The ones he selected had about 1% "no votes."

We were extremely disappointed in the way the BoE handled the process. They were very secretive and stonewalled when we asked to look at anything beyond the ballots.

Even though we asked, we were not permitted to see [for each of the 3 precincts being recounted]: the voter signature books, provisional ballot tallies, provisional ballots, the actual machines and ballot booklets used at the precincts.

And they did not let us see the testing of the tabulation machine.