Re: Audit result?

[Neal McBurnett <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 03:30:21AM -0700, Paul Tiger wrote:
> It is my understanding that the audit has been completed, however there is no
> news on the clerk's website. In fact the last public information posting on
> that site is dated Nov 7th.

Some updated results for the race are here - I'm not sure if
everything is there but I think some provisionals are - there wasn't
much change in the margin with over 200 new votes:

http://webpubapps.bouldercounty.org/clerk/2008ElectionResults/IssueResults.aspx?issue=ind64

City Of Longmont Ballot Question 2A - Active Voters: 44,521
Percent	Votes
YES		50.49%	18,622
NO		49.51%	18,257

Total Votes		36,879

was:

City Of Longmont Ballot Question 2A - Active Voters: 44,521
Percent	Votes
YES		50.50%	18,508
NO		49.50%	18,138

Total Votes		36,646

> Jessie Cornelius, the PIO for the clerk is cc'd on this email, with the hopes
> that their may be some official response from the Office of the Clerk &
> Recorder.
> 
> Beyond that, does anyone listening in here know what the audit turned up?

Longmont 2A is the most-audited race, as you can see at this page

 http://bcn.boulder.co.us/~neal/elections/boulder-audit-08-11/results/

on the site I sent out before:

 http://bcn.boulder.co.us/~neal/elections/boulder-audit-08-11/

And perhaps the most-audited in Boulder's history.  I think that gives
us more confidence in the counting of this race than we've had in most
races in the past.

We have completed nearly all the first and second counts, and are in
the assessment phase, with a few more 3rd-counts to come.  I haven't
posted the detailed results yet, pending review with others on the canvass
board.  But the hand counts generally either agree exactly with the
system counts or differ by just one or two out of about 500.  The
hand counting has been hard due to the huge ballots which come in two
sheets which we can't separate, so we have used the "announce and
tally" method rather than the better "stack and count".  So I think
we're doing well.

> Longmont's only ballot issue was separated by a 1% margin, as the Longmont
> clerk informed the city's elections task force at last Thursday's regular
> meeting (the 13th). At last night's council session (Tuesday the 18th), members
> of council and others were interested to know what might have occurred after
> the provisional ballots were counted.

I meant to call you, Paul, but kept getting swept away by the volume
of work.  We should know more today.

> It has been my assertion (or assumption) that the audit only dealt with the
> tally as completed by the clerk and staff, and did not cover tallies after the
> week of the election. If the provisional ballots caused the margin of Longmont
> issue 2A to close to .05% or less, then an automatic recount would take place.
> The audit which included the Longmont issue would not include the provisional
> ballots.

That doesn't look like an issue.

> Still no word on this very close race in Longmont.

We're all watching it!
Thanks,

Neal McBurnett                 http://neal.mcburnett.org/

> --
> 
> Paul Tiger
> 
> 303.774.6383 Home
> 
> 720.323.0570 Cell
> 
> 303.651.7919 Business
> 
>  
>