Ms. Dennis, In case our May 18th appeal has fallen
between the cracks, I am retransmitting it to you. Al From: Secretary of State Dennis, This travesty has been going on for more
than a year. Recent evidence, August 2005 – May 2006, is attached and
summarized below. Before the HART vote counting equipment
was purchased, It appears that the clerk’s office
is working to block timely legal action against their illegal use of marked
ballots. Is it your duty to intervene? If
so, please do. If not, who is the responsible party that can compel
Attached: August
3, 2005 -- Kolwicz to Liss. Will you share with us the county's plan for providing anonymous
voting in November? August 17 – Kolwicz to Liss.
Please let us know when you intend to reply? August 26 – Third request. April 10, 2006 – Kolwicz to
Bailey. We wish to know whether the paper ballots
to be used for the August 2006 election and the November 2006 election will be marked by the county/vendor/printer in
any way whereby the ballot can be uniquely identified. This would include
identifying numbers, bar codes, and/or any other marking that can be used to
identify a particular ballot. If they are on the ballot that is issued
to the voter, then we wish to know if all such identifying markings are removed
from the ballot before the ballot is cast. April 12 – Bailey to Kolwicz.
There are no records. Direct your questions to the Elections
Division. April 12 – Kolwicz to Salas.
Please respond to query. April 14 – Kolwicz to Salas.
Is there a reason you cannot respond? April 25 – Kolwicz to Salas.
If you do not know answer, please tell us that. May 8 – Kolwicz to Salas.
When may we expect answers? |