Reject Boulder County RFP #4717-06

[Joe Pezzillo <ejoe@xxxxxxxx>]

12/28/05 (7:45am)

Boulder County Has Already Rejected E-Voting, Why is the Clerk Trying  
to Sneak it in?

In a truly unprecedented and historic moment in Boulder County, the  
four main local political parties -- Democrats, Republicans, Greens  
and Libertarians -- all agreed that electronic voting was an  
inappropriate technology that should not be adopted for use here.

That was January 2004. What has changed since then? If anything,  
electronic voting has been found to be even less trustworthy than  
suspected, with several states having banned vendors from operating  
faulty equipment in their elections, voter and class action lawsuits  
filed and many widely documented errors in vote tabulation.

Local citizens declared two years ago that we don't want electronic  
voting to be used in Boulder County, and instead want our votes  
indelibly recorded on the time-tested and repeatedly proven method of  
paper ballots, a medium that during casting and counting can be  
verified by voters and pollworkers.

The Boulder County Clerk reluctantly rescinded that attempt to  
purchase Direct Record Electronic voting terminals (known as "DRE"s).  
Unfortunately, the Clerk instead rushed to purchase the mail ballot  
system offered by the vendor whose DRE devices she wanted, without  
sufficient analysis, and the rest is now well documented history:  
unacceptable counting speed for election day use; non-secret ballots;  
documented mis-counted votes in testing; and unanswered questions  
about the level (and cost) of support.

Now, the Boulder County Clerk is trying to sneak in the same DRE  
machines we'd previously rejected -- and also the use of vote centers  
-- by releasing a new and insufficient purchase proposal and allowing  
only two days for public comment, one on either side of the Christmas  
Holiday.

The Clerk will contend that there's no time for thorough analysis,  
that this equipment must be purchased fast because the election is  
coming up and she has to meet Help America Vote Act (HAVA) requirements.

This is like deja vu all over again.

For more and more citizens of Boulder County, it's obvious what a  
monumental mistake it would be to allow the Clerk to purchase more  
equipment that will be used in our elections for years to come. It  
should also be clear that every one of the Clerk's (and vendor's)  
claims about any systems, processes or legal requirements need to be  
checked carefully before they can be trusted.

This is a decision that should be made thoughtfully, slowly and with  
maximum public input, not forced through at the last minute by a few  
people with poor planning skills behind closed doors using a  
constantly shifting set of justifications.

Salas' office has demonstrated that it is unqualified to make this  
decision. A fundamental lack of quality control, an inability to  
distinguish between sales hype and real-world needs, not enough time  
devoted to developing requirements...these are not the traits of any  
successful project, let alone a voting system implementation.

Compared with two years ago, there are better devices now available  
that meet both the citizen's and HAVA's requirements. Ballot markers  
with a computer touch screen and audio interfaces print the voter's  
choices out onto a normal ballot. These devices are the current best  
implementation of the dual requirements for accessibility and paper  
ballots.

The Clerk will say ballot markers are "not certified in Colorado" but  
she used uncertified equipment in 2003 with no repercussions. The  
system used in November 2005 that was purchased with HAVA funds  
doesn't meet that law's error rate requirement.

These devices have been federally certified, certified in other  
states, and are available from multiple vendors. Real-world testing  
among the disability communities in Oregon and New Mexico found the  
ballot marker to be the #1 choice, ahead of computer voting tablets.

Has anyone at the Boulder County Clerk's office ever requested they  
be certified or considered an RFP for them?

Is the Clerk's inability to plan reason enough to purchase unproven  
equipment? Is the public aware that the current RFP calls for  
unproven technologies such as wireless transmission of voting data?  
Should we be requiring that new equipment be compatible with the  
previous equipment she purchased that has proven it isn't suitable  
for general use and has a documented 1.6% error rate in testing, or  
are we "throwing good money after bad"? Do we want to have private  
companies counting our votes using secret software? Do citizens want  
to replace precinct voting (and organizing) with "vote centers"? Do  
vote centers really provide more convenience than early voting? Do  
citizens want their votes stored in computer memories that can be  
altered without detection?

The Clerk's office has seriously damaged voter confidence in our  
community, and left many people on all sides of the political  
spectrum wondering if their votes have been correctly counted.

When will Boulder County voters get a commitment to trustworthy  
elections that are secure, reliable and verifiable?

(786 words)