Washblog

Over the last few months, the King County Council and three separate panels convened by the Council -- of citizens, election officials, and experts in election security -- have reviewed a proposed major purchase by King County Records, Elections, and Licensing (REALS).

This would be a complex purchase expected to cost more than two million dollars initially and to incur even greater ongoing costs in the next few years.  It would result in a comprehensive overhaul by the 2008 general election of how the county validates, sorts, and tracks ballots.  It would outsource much of the work now done in-house.

It includes the purchase of the VoteHere Mail-in Ballot Tracker (MiBT), which is the focus of this story.  The County Council and all three panels that have reviewed the plan strongly recommend against adopting it:

1. King County Citizen Election Oversight Committee (CEOC)
   Review of the Executive's Proposal to Purchase Election Equipment and Software, July, 2007.
2. King County Council
   Proposed Ordinance 2007-0402, July, 2007.
3. Expert Review by Lazarus Technology Mentoring, Inc.
   Expert and Peer Security Reviews of Elections Ballot Tracking and Accountability Case, July, 2007.
4. Peer review by election officials
   Expert and Peer Security Reviews of Elections Ballot Tracking and Accountability Case, July, 2007, p 12 +.

Reverend DeForest Soaries, Jr., convened the panel of elections officials that provided the peer review of REALS' plan.  Reverend Soaries is the former New Jersey Secretary of State and the former chairman of the Federal Election Assistance Commission.  Recently, he offered a follow-up message to the members of the King County Council.  This message, posted on Washblog, urges the members of the Council to heed the warning of elections officials in that review that the proposed upgrades carry no upside but do carry considerable risks.

This issue remains important: Despite Monday's decision, REALS and others are determined to buy and use VoteHere's Mail-in Ballot Tracker.

The video from Monday's council meeting is now online. You need something like RealAlternative media player to watch it. My testimony starts at 1h22m, discussion resumes at 1h50m, and the elections staff feels the heat at 2h02m.

Under questioning, Director Sherril Huff continued to muddy the waters. Councilmember Julia Patterson, while well intentioned, made (value) statements I strongly disagree with.

Below the fold, I attempt to (better) explain the details of ballot tracking, which is distinct from batch accountability. I also attempt to respond to Patterson's enthusiasm for computerization.

Yesterday, King County Council decided (2007-0328) against both VoteHere's Mail-in Ballot Tracker (MiBT) and any automated signature verification system.

This decision removes, for now, two very bad parts of the executive's reckless plan to overhaul our elections.

The remainder of the ballot accountability and tracking business case, purchasing Pitney-Bowes sorters and bringing that task in-house, is pretty good -- I support that move. Though, my inner penny-pincher wished we'd lease instead of buy.

Please follow the flip, for details, acknowledgments, some observations, and more background info.

Described as "bizzare" by Jonathan over at NPI blog tonight, I'm glad to see that Dick Spady's I-24 will was adopted by King County. While I've never really seen it explained very well, what I understand of I-24, it falls very close to my heart. What the initiative tries to do is to establish voluntary citizen discussion groups across King County. The point isn't to create a new level of bureaucracy or a new citizen ombudsman, but to give people an easy way to get together and talk about their communities and their government.

And, that the idea revolves around small discussion groups, rather than one-on-one emails, interviews, or surveys, is very attractive. I find that when you get people talking about a topic, rather than simply pontificating, ideas get better. Think of the citizen assembly that British Columbia brought together to reform their election laws or participatory budgeting in Brazil.

I can easily understand how people can perceive even local governments as being too big or too distant to properly engage in. The short public comment period during any local council meeting is not sufficient (and often times not even considered actually "public communication") for citizens to talk with their government. What I think I-24 will do will at least symbolically be King County saying "Hey, what do you think?"

Which brings me to the Ward Republics of Jefferson.

Oh, how novel. Our elections officials just make stuff up. And Goldy faithfully repeats it. Again.

Last time, Goldy repeated Dwight "Diebold! Diebold! Diebold!" Pelz's nonsense that the reckless plan to completely overhaul our elections was merely an upgrade.

The time before that, Goldy spun a yarn about how forced mail voting yields earlier election results. Wrong, as I explained here and here.

This time, our Sec of State Sam Reed repeats the half truth that forced mail voting boosts voter turnout. Predictably, Goldy jumps with joy.

Debunking below the fold.

King County Executive and Election Services (REALS) continue to claim that we

• need new tabulation equipment to handle the anticipated increased number of mail ballots

• that our existing tabulation equipment isn't sufficient for the task

• we'd need to buy more units of our existing central count tabulators in order to scale up

Naturally, each of these talking points are false.

This post (below the fold) recaps this sub debate. Although I've covered this topic before, there's new data (exposing untruths by King County Elections) and my analysis is refined.

Well. Darn. My Democrats Embrace Election Integrity praise for the King County Council was premature. According to Garth Fell and Bobbie Egan, King County Elections (REALS) still plans to buy the new Diebold, VoteHere, and Pitney-Bowes gear and use it in the presidential 2008 election.

How did this happen? The council's motion 2007-0402 says that it prefers REALS used our existing equipment for the 2008 presidential election. It didn't disallow the use of new equipment, as I had thought.

We attended yesterday's Citizen Election Oversight Committee (CEOC) (Wed Aug 8th) meeting. Below the fold is my recap.

This Tuesday, the Association to Defend Affordable Housing filed suit against the Port of Seattle and the City of Burien in order to save 162 units of affordable housing at Lora Lake apartments in Burien. A copy of the Petition initiating the lawsuit is below the fold.

Lora Lake, a development with 234 units, stands empty now, the tenants having been forced to move out earlier this summer.  A demolition permit was issued based on an assessment that all the units would be within the buffer zone of Seatac Airport's proposed Third Runway.  But that assessment was made back in the late 1990s and since then it has turned out that most of these apartments -- 162 of them -- are not within this buffer.  Nevertheless, the Port of Seattle and the City of Burien have continued on the path of tearing down all of Lora Lake. (Two Port candidates, incumbent Commissioner Alec Fisken and Burien Councilmember Jack Block, Jr., did vote to preserve this housing.)

All of this is happening during a housing crisis in King County. Eight thousand people in the county each night are homeless. County Executive Ron Sims did try to step in on Lora Lake, offering to buy the 162 units from the Port at market rate.   But that offer was not accepted.   Reecently, a corner was turned.  The day after the Church Council of Greater Seattle held an Interfaith Service of Lamentation at the site, three commissioners on the Port of Seattle, Bob Edwards, Lloyd Hara, and Alec Fisken, voted to suspend the demolition pending a special meeting of the full Commission and directed Port Commission staff to work on finding a compromise.* This lawsuit will make it much more likely that a compromise will be found -- and that it will be one that gets the Lora Lake tenants back home.

Thanks to Jeffuppy for previous Washblog story ( Port of Seattle Candidate has ties to Ports contractor) and additional links to sources that I use in this story.

Jack Block, Jr., is a highly-qualified, well-endorsed, and well-spoken candidate for Seattle Port Commission.  The Municipal League gave him their highest rating for the position:   OUTSTANDING. Gael Tarleton, another candidate for the same position, told me in a phone conversation last week that he's not an appropriate or qualified choice for the position.  With all due respect, she's mistaken.

Like Jack Block, Jr., Ms. Tarleton is also well-spoken, endorsed, and qualified, with an OUTSTANDING rating from the Municipal League.  Unlike Block, who is a Burien City Councilmember and was the Deputy Mayor for that city in 2006, Tarleton hasn't served in elected office.  So we can't see behind the curtain of public decisions she's