Re: Friday's Meeting with Boulder City and County Clerks

[Ralph Shnelvar <ralphs@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear all:

On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 14:37:58 -0700, Joe Pezzillo wrote:

>
>12/19/2004
>
>Greetings!
>
>Thanks to Ralph Shnelvar's efforts, Boulder City Clerk Alisa Lewis met 
>with Neal McBurnett, Ralph and me on Friday afternoon at the big table 
>downstairs at the City building, along with Linda Salas, Boulder County 
>Clerk, and Diane whose last name I didn't get, but who manages 
>financial compliance and/or matching funds for city elections, and we 
>discussed the upcoming March 2005 City Election plan.
>
>Neal and Ralph may wish to describe the concerns that they voiced 
>(and/or heard) separately, such as fundamental concerns about the use 
>of mail ballots, but I mostly presented information about the Swiss 
>method of voting, including showing the sample ballots that quickly and 
>visually explain how hand counting can actually be cheaper and easier 
>than what we've got now.
>

It is with great sadness that I must report that it appears that mail
ballots are "a done deal."  I do not believe that there is the political
will in Boulder to demand an election where the validity of the ballots
submitted actually reflect those who are franchised to vote and who actually
voted their franchise.

Alisa's comment that a mail ballot election would raise voter participation
begs the question as to why greater voter participation by those too lazy to
come to a precinct is a public good.  Indeed, one can surmise that mail-in
ballots do nothing but increase "noise" in the system because those who do
not wish to exert the effort to come to a precinct are also unlikely to do
the necessary research to come to an independent informed decision on
matters of public trust and policy.



Having expressed my sadness at the lack of political will regarding mail-in
ballots, let me say that I was delighted to see the public-spirt mindedness
of both Alisa Lewis and County CLerk Linda Salas in being willing to
seriously entertain the hand counting of ballots.

It is my objective to see that elections are fair and open.  The hand
counting of ballots will be a huge step in that direction.  Let us hope that
this huge (but comparitively easy) step is adopted by Boulder.  This is the
perfect election to try this out.

Perhaps if we can get the hand counting of ballots, that, then, the
citizenry will be less cynical about how elections are held in Boulder and
the turnout will be higher; whether by mail ballots and/or precinct
elections.



Both Alisa and Linda presented cost estimates for mail v. precinct
elections.  Those numbers are publicly available.  If Joe and/or Neal could
point readers at those numbers, I am sure that the readers would be
grateful.

One of the costs that - as far as I can tell - was not included in the
estimates was the cost of stamps that each citizen who wished to vote would
have to pay for.  This appears to be an "off budget" item because,
obviously, the City does not directly pay for this out of funds in the
City's coffer's.

At approximately $0.70/ballot, if this cost to the citizens of the election
were added (and this is money that the citizens are truly spending) then it
would appear that the true cost of a mail-in ballot to the citizens of
Boulder vastly exceed the cost of a precinct election.  Yes, the "cost"
*apparently* drops to zero if the citizen drops off the ballot at a central
location but then the citizen must make a special trip and that, too, costs
time and money.

So, Alisa, I ask you to please consider that the governance of Boulder is
not government v. citizens; but that the total cost to citizens be the
appropriate measure of the cost of the election rather than the
out-of-pocket cost to the government of the City of Boulder.  A mail-in
ballot is a hidden tax on the citizens of Boulder.

It is my opinion upon reviewing the numbers that a precinct election would
reflect a total lower cost to the citizens of Boulder and that that is what
you, Alisa, as a government official, should be considering as, perhaps, one
of the major concern.


Respectfully,

Ralph Shnelvar