2004 Ballot Recount: Observer Report

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

December 15, 2004:
Report by Green Party Observer 1

I just came from the Board of Elections and here is my pre-recount report.

Precincts were selected randomly during the course of business today with the Director and Deputy Director of the Board of Elections with two witnesses present (both IT specialists for the board so that they could compute the 3%); 475 precinct cards were shuffled and then chosen randomly from the pile. The following precincts that were chosen were: Akron 3K-4A-5D-5E-7C-7L-9B Cuyahoga Falls 8C Hudson 2E Stow 1F-4H Twinsburg 1C Springfield A-B

Okay. Now here is the layout of the room. There is a row of chairs for the observers to sit in, away from the tables, meaning that at best we might be able to catch a glance of the tables closest to the chairs; at this time I am being told that we will not be able to stand aside tables to actually witness chad issues, overcount issues, etc. There is a Democrat and Republican at each table doing the manual hand count, and I was told to trust their integrity. We must be quiet in this area so that we can have the workers concentrate on the count. If there are disputed ballots we will be told, though the process seems vague from the Director's point of view of how actually they will engage in the resolution of those ballots.

Three or four of us will be allowed back in the machine room to watch the ballots go through after hand counted to verify the tabulations; we will also be able to inspect the canvas bag with the machines, though if we are not actually being allowed to go forth and see the actual ballots, I don't know why the inspection of the canvas bag would be applicable. A few of us are able to talk quietly near the front of the room and request signature poll books, precinct totals, and other reports that we want to inspect. We will coordinate our efforts on this and rotate this role. The county is seeing this process as procedural, we'll have to see what, if any, other directive we get from the Green Party, or any attorney that can clarify if we can be more invasive in this process.

The Summit County Democratic Party last week told me that they were not organizing observers, though have received word just an hour ago that they were. We are covered in terms of shifts; for those of you who can only be available for a few hours and that was stated on the sign in sheets from the weekend, that is what I have you down for. We have ample coverage at this time, and maybe overloaded depending on how many volunteers the Dems send down.

I realize that we are running by the seat of our pants and that the training I received last week for what to be prepared for is nothing of what is actually happening. I am doing my best to gain clarity. Great talk show on WCPN, 90.3 this morning on how there is a contradiction of information surrounding the recount process.

I was able to call in and ask a question with regard to voter record lockdown. Carlo LeParo, spokesperson for the Secretary of State, said that at the moment all voter records need to be observed by all parties present in the recount, and Michael Vu, Director for the Board of Elections in Cuyahoga County, stated that they are answering requests as they come in.

I did receive the provisional ballot report; though I have no access to how to contact these folks. There is no problem receiving a voter database from the county, however, they withold phone numbers, so I will determine tomorrow how we want to proceed in contacting provisional rejected votes. Many of the provisional votes were accepted in Summit county. There are a few dozen that were tossed out for wrong precinct, or that the voter was not registered. Let's keep an optimistic attitude for whatever may be tomorrow. For those who are coming at 8:00, if you can come fifteen minutes early so that we have enough people on hand to listen as the instructions are given to the workers that would be great. There is parking as well behind the Board of Elections building. That's the skinny for the moment.

December 15, 2004:
Report by Green Party Observer 2

The Summit County Recount started officially with an opening session of the Board of Elections on Tuesday, December 14. 2004. At this time I asked how the random selection of the 3% handcount would proceed and was told that earlier in the day (Tuesday), the Director and Deputy Director took the cards of the 475 precincts in Summit County and randomly drew the precincts. Two other Board employees were present as witnesses, one of them being an IT specialist who was charged with tabulating votes to ensure that 3% of the vote was counted.

Overall, 14 precincts were selected. I was then given a tour of the space in which the recount would take place, and inquired with the Director of the Board of Elections, Bryan Williams, as to where the observers would be able to monitor the recount. I was told that the observers would view the recount from the chairs set alongside the wall, roughly three to four feet from the tables. I followed up with the difficulties that would arise from being able to observe the ballots from that distance, and was told that this what the Board does for any recount procedure.

Thanks to two lawyers helping the Cobb Recount Effort, I was given Ohio Revised Code (ORC) statute and opinion that in a Presidential candidate requested recount that we as observers were within our legal right to be able to have full view of the ballots while being counted. Enroute to the Board of Elections on Wednesday morning, December 15. 2004, I called and spoke to the Director's assistant, Steve (did not catch last name) and told him of our statutory right to be able to stand at the table to be able to view the ballot. After a few minutes of being put on hold, I was told that it would be determined as to where the observers would be placed when I arrived.

At 8:00 a.m. the observers were told that there would be no food and drink allowed, to park our coffee cups on the counter and once in the room we would be given further directions. The last comment made by Bryan Williams was that we would have access to the tables where the recount would take place.

The directions were given to us by John Schmidt, Deputy Director of the Board of Elections; we as observers would be allowed to stand at the head of the table where the workers would be doing the recount, and that we were not to utter a word, that the room would be in complete silence for the duration of the recount. We were not to interfere in the recount process, we would not be able to ask to have the ballot inspection go according to our tempo, that we were discouraged to challenge or dispute a ballot, and again a strong emphasis on that we were to be silent throughout the process. I asked for clarification on how then it would be that we as observers would be able to contest a ballot or to request without that ballot being lost in the pile since again we were told to keep silent, and the response was that we could get the attention of one of the "line supervisors" to make our point.

The ballots were brought out, already in bins, the canvas bag was presented at the table, and we were off to the races!! I felt bewilderment in that no one was clear in how to communicate under gag order, that many of the tables placed the ballot book on the opposite side of the table so that it was difficult at best to determine the rotation of the candidates for that particular precinct to watch for ballot irregularities.

Stalwart we proceeded. Many of us were continually told to back away from the tables where the count was taking place. One observer noted, "John Schmidt was as antagonistic as he could be, as though his job was to make the day as difficult as possible; he asked us to stand away from the tables so we took a position at the end of the table. He drew a line on the floor with tape even though the volunteers were behind it the whole time. He even threatened to throw me out because he said I was too close. When he put the tape down, it was obvious that we were behind his imaginary line."

Another observer commented, "John Schmidt asked me to step back from the line. There was no line, told me it was the line of the table. I was behind it. He made me take two steps back and was fairly rude and difficult. It seemed as though he was trying to make an example of me and two others. He took masking tape and laid it on the carpet and said we must stay behind the tape. The thing was the tables weren't lined up evenly so while I was behind the table I was monitoring, I was in front of the table line to my left. It seemed to me this guy just wanted to bully someone. There was no mention of staying behind lines before we took our places."

I was also threatened with removal from the premises if my lips moved, the deputy director was very determined that there was not to be a single whisper in the room from anyone. I was walking around to some of the volunteers who looked bewildered to say in my quietest of voices just to observe and write down anything that would document the moment. I can appreciate the notion of wanting silence, but the vigilance at which we were scrutinized and admonished was nearly absurd.

I did step outside to seek counsel on the matter of being pushed away from the table and contacted Donald McTigue who advised me that we as observers should have the opportunity to be looking over the shoulders of the workers if we so desired. It was also stated that we were within our right to set the pace of the ballot count and that we had the right to dispute or challenge a ballot. This would be difficult to do I told him since no one is able to communicate with the table counters, nor were we to utter a single word while observing. He suggested that he call the BOE, and I concurred that they should be made aware that we were requesting was within reason within the law.

The pace of the recount was extremely fast; all ballot counting was done by 1:10 p.m. Two of the precincts came back out for a second round of hand count because the initial run of the machine count did not match the hand count, those precincts being Stow 1-F, and Akron 3-K. It took the complete time of the recount to hand reconcile Akron 5-D. This precinct it seemed during the hand count refused to match the official machine count that was given on election night. An observer also noted that there was some discrepancy with both Springfield township precincts A and B. "After the double hand recounts at Springfield A, the tallies did not appear to match with the computer generated count. BOE official then recounted the ballots, primarily stacks #6 and #8, but it appeared that it was #6 that did not match the machine printout. The officials then went to table Springfield B to count that table, perhaps to see if a ballot was mixed up between A and B precincts."

Another observer commented that one of the workers was shielding her count from the observers in what could be perceived as deliberate. "Team #7, Bernie, kept the ballots hidden by holding her contrast (yellow) sheet over them so I couldn't see the holes. She held the yellow sheet in her left hand and as she moved one ballot from in front of her with her right and into the line of sight, she covered it with the yellow sheet."

When there was a discrepancy, it was nearly impossible to hear what the line supervisor determined the ballot should be counted as since voices were kept to a minimum by the employees and we were not allowed to lean in to hear what the discrepancy was. This happened a number of times throughout the recount process.

Four observers were allowed to view the machine tabulation of the ballots that had been hand counted, one to represent each of the presidential candidates, and not for the write in candidate. I was told by one of our observers that when the process commenced that the directions would be given once and only once to expedite the process. We did have two of the observers that were trained under me in the machine room, and there were no complaints from either that they did not understand the process. Attached with this report is a full count spreadsheet supplied by one of our observers of his tabulations.

I requested the opportunity to review the rejected provisional and absentee ballots and was denied that request. I also requested that we view the signature books that corresponded to the ballots being hand counted, and again the request was denied. I did have a conversation later in the day with the director, Bryan Williams, and was told that the BOE was unable to accommodate our request today, and they would be happy to allow us to view these materials over the next few days.

The machine tally for the rest of the ballots in Summit County will take place on Thursday, December 16, beginning at 8:00 a.m. We are told that the process will take a few hours.