Bad ballot markings

["Some Guy" <someguy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Here's today's Times-Call story on the scanner errors. The imperceptible dot
must have been Neal.
-paul
<><><><><>
Bad ballot markings bog down first election test run
By Pierrette J. Shields
The Daily Times-Call

BOULDER - The machines counted properly marked sample ballots correctly, but
it took three days to determine the final result of the county's
ballot-counting test because improperly marked ballots caused problems.

The Boulder County clerk's office spent hours trying to detect why eight
optical scanning machines were having trouble getting the same results in
two races in a test deck of sample ballots.

"It all had to do with non-uniform vote marking," Boulder County elections
manager Tom Halicki said about the delay in wrapping up the standard test of
the elections equipment.

By law, counties must perform logic and accuracy tests, or LATs, of
ballot-counting equipment. The first test must be completed within 10 days
of the election. Two more are done on Election Day before live ballots are
scanned and tallied.

The first test, which started last week, uses decks of 25 sample ballots
marked by representatives of local political parties and jurisdictions. The
markers keep a tally of the way they marked the ballots, and when the deck
is run through the ballot scanners, results are compared. If the results do
not match, election officials try to find where the discrepancy came in and
whether it was a problem with the human tally or the computer tally.

Overvotes, undervotes and blank ballots are kicked out of the machine for a
bipartisan resolution team to examine to determine the intent of the voter.
When a ballot is resolved, the vote is programmed into the tally.

During last week's session to mark the test decks, party and jurisdictional
representatives were told how to properly mark ballots, but markers for the
Republican and Libertarian parties deviated from the instructions
considerably.

Ultimately, those test ballots caused difficulties for the machines.

On a properly marked ballot, a blue or black mark is placed inside of a box
next to the selection. According to the Colorado secretary of state's
election rules, a ballot that does not have a mark inside of the box as
instructed is considered blank and shouldn't be counted. For instance, if
the box is circled, the scanner won't read it and the vote shouldn't be
counted.

The scanners are also extremely sensitive. If a voter puts a checkmark in a
box, the vote will be tallied by the machine, according to the tests. But if
the tail of the check mark leaves one box and extends into another, the
scanner will see two votes in one race and kick out the ballot as an
overvote for judges to resolve.

Halicki said a tiny dot on the line of a box on one of the sample ballots
was being read by some of the eight scanners in the test and not others. It
took hours to discover the dot with the naked eye.

"It would vary between machines," Halicki said.

Repeating these tests on Election Day and tracking down similar problems
could cause considerable delays in running the day's ballots through the
machine.

Linda Herod - project manager for Hart InterCivic, the company that makes
the scanners used by Boulder County - said the machines performed exactly as
they should: They tallied properly marked ballots the same way. However,
they were tripped up by improperly marked ballots.

"If you want your vote to count properly, mark it properly," she said.

Al Kolwicz, representative for the Republican Party during the test and
critic of ballot-counting processes, has sent a letter of complaint to the
county regarding the tests. He does not believe the machines are accurate
enough to interpret voter intent every time. Other parties and jurisdictions
involved in the test have signed off on the results, Halicki said.

Pierrette J. Shields can be reached at 303776-2244, Ext. 273, or by e-mail
at pshields@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx