Forced Mail Ballot and Amendment 28 Follow-up

["Joe Pezzillo" <jpezzillo@xxxxxxxxx>]

5/26/05

What's unfortunate about the Public Hearing format is that there is no 
opportunity for citizens to respond to your concerns.

While I appreciate that the "Amendment 28" issue may not technically 
prohibit an all-mail-ballot election, it must be obvious that the 
spirit of the amendment is this:

"Do voters want to be forced to vote by mail ballot only?"

Your decision today effectively forces us to vote by mail ballot, even 
if the voters prefer precinct elections, which is not only a clear 
interpretation of the results of the outcome of 28, it's also the 
sentiment expressed by at least one Commissioner.

Importantly, those who desire precinct elections are being damaged by 
your decision, and prevented from casting their vote with confidence.

In any normal precinct election, any voter who wishes to vote by mail 
is able to do so using the absentee ballot. In a mail ballot only 
election, there is no opportunity to have the democracy-building 
practice of neighborhood in-person precinct voting.

You wonder why there is limited participation by election judges? 
Perhaps it's because the current system and administration have been 
continually eroding confidence in the democratic process. Perhaps hand 
counting in the precincts would restore our faith in the system and 
inspire participation by voters and poll workers. Indeed, a year ago 
the Clerk was presented with the names of more than 100 County 
residents who would VOLUNTEER their time at no charge to hand count 
ballots. No attempt was made to include those people in the elections 
process, and yet we must suffer unjustified complaints that there is 
insufficient labor resource available.

What you have decided is that those of us who do not wish to vote by 
mail ballot do not have a choice, we must use this flawed method 
instead of the many superior methods that have been offered and are 
available to us.

Therefore, despite any technical interpretation of the law to claim 
that it doesn't prohibit mail ballots, it is clearly a violation of the 
spirit of the amendment and the trust of the voters to prevent us from 
being able to achieve trustworthy elections in our own neighborhoods.

It is further unfortunate that you did not choose at least to wait 
until the findings of the ERC in three weeks to see if our election 
system should continue to be used, given the expensive proprietary and 
high-precision ballots and the Constitutionally invalid non-removable 
serial number required by the system, not to mention the poor customer 
service from the vendor. It's also disappointing that you accept the 
argument that it is the mail ballot itself, and not the actual issues 
on the ballot, that have the greatest impact on voter turnout, the City 
election in March of this year is an obvious example.

I hope that our democracy can be restored.

Joe Pezzillo, Citizen Activist
PO Box J
Boulder, Colorado USA 80306
jpezzillo@xxxxxxxxx
303-938-8850