Monterey County Grand Jury
• 2012-2013
2012 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury Interim Final Report No. 1 Election Integrity Upheld by Monterey County Elections
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 7 findings
F1
The allegation that voter fraud is "rampant" is unfounded. California already has a law in place that requires voters to produce ID when they register to vote. The present procedures of setting up multiple check points in voter registration and validation of a voter's identity that is conducted by MCED appears more than adequate to safeguard voter fraud.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
We recommend that all county supervisors and every elected official in the county visit MCED to become thoroughly acquainted with the complex procedures in voter registration, validation of identity and vote tabulation that assures election integrity. The MCED reports to the Monterey County Board of Supervisors and it is understood that only one of the five sitting members has officially visited the MCED office.
F2
MCED has made strong efforts to carry out the "one man, one vote" mandate by regularly updating its database, reaching out to every eligible voter and trying to make every vote count. But despite its effort, almost 6.6% of eligible voters failed to provide updated personal information (such as change of address, change of name) to the MCED or to the Department of Motor Vehicles and may therefore disenfranchise themselves.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
We recommend a robust voter education campaign that not only urges voters to register and vote, but urges voters to update their personal information with MCED if they change address or names, or if a family member has become deceased. Clearer instruction should be given on how to vote by mail or use the ballot. Lastly, voters should also be urged to read the voting materials mailed to them, so they become better informed voters on the issues.
F3
MCED relies primarily on county health officer's monthly report of death in the county, and on obituaries published in local newspaper to update its voter register. The Secretary of State also depends on the State Department of Health Services database to provide the counties with records of deceased voters.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
We recommend that MCED and the Secretary of State utilize the Social Security Administration's master death index to regularly update the voter registration database.
F4
13.7% of the ballots cast by voters in the most recent election were damaged and unreadable by the optical vote tabulating scanner, primarily because voters failed to follow voting instructions. MCED had to duplicate over 7,000 ballots in order to capture the voter's intent. The process is both costly and time consuming.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
Because of the high rate (13.7%) of damaged ballots due to voters' failure to follow balloting instructions, we urge the consideration of a better designed and more user-friendly ballot for future elections. One alternative may be the redeployment of touch-screen voting machines once public confidence in tamperproof electronic devices is fully restored. A different way of tabulating votes should also be considered, because the three central optical high-speed scanners had problems "reading" a high percentage of ballots in the last election.
F5
In 2002, the county spent almost $4 million of tax-payers money purchasing touch-screen voting machines, software and auxiliary equipment such as printers. The voting machines were decertified by the Secretary of State in August 2007, but can be certified if they are modified to meet specific conditions. Most of them are sitting idle in the office of MCED, only some are used by the disabled during election day.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
The city of Carmel-by-the-Sea should consider all costs and the level of service provided by the competing choices when making the decision on who to use to conduct their elections in the future.
F6
Although a private contractor appears to cost less than MCED's bid for running Carmel-by- the-Sea's stand-alone municipal elections in April 2010 and 2012, city officials did not take into account the actual costs of paid staff time for their own city clerk and staff.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6
We recommend that the Board of Supervisors support a proposal by the MCED for a different facility with at least 25,000 square feet space mentioned earlier in order to provide adequate space during the election period and to provide on-site storage of all MCED property and records.
F7
The office of MCED in Salinas on Highway 68 E is inadequate for its operation. Possibly usable equipment lies idle. The department has to budget an extra $20,600 annually for leasing three storage facilities and the expense of staff time traveling to them to retrieve materials.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7
The MCED should work with the Secretary of State to resolve the issue of the idle Sequoia Voting Machines.
No Responses Found 2
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Carmel-by-the-Sea
City
Monterey County Board of Supervisors
Elected County Office