📋
Extraído del Informe Consolidado

Esta investigación fue publicada originalmente como parte de un informe consolidado más amplio que contiene múltiples investigaciones. Consulte el PDF consolidado para ver el documento completo.

Santa Cruz County Grand Jury • 2016-2017

County Elections Department found no such evidence here

Published: June 29, 2017 3 pages
View PDF View Full Original

Findings and Recommendations 16 findings

F1
Elections in Santa Cruz County are run fairly and conscientiously, with numerous procedures and safeguards that minimize the likelihood of fraud or systemic errors. Although minor problems occurred, we consider these inevitable given the number of people and the complexity of the process, and they were detected or reported and remedied expeditiously.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
Most equipment used to conduct the election is old, much of it nearing or past its useful life. This includes voting machines and electronic and mechanical vote counting systems. Spare parts are increasingly hard to find.
No recommendations for this finding
F3
Santa Cruz County uses a state certified system that meets state standards. Beyond keeping some key systems offline, this equipment does not implement adequate computer security measures.
No recommendations for this finding
F4
Santa Cruz County limits physical access to the ballots and the machinery used to process the ballots and conducts comprehensive audits both before and after every election.
No recommendations for this finding
F5
Voting equipment that the county would select to replace its aging infrastructure has not yet been certified. When the certified replacement equipment becomes available, it is not clear when funds might be provided.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
Re-use of USB drives on the offline vote collection systems, after being attached to an internet-connected system, is a possible avenue to compromise the offline systems.
No recommendations for this finding
F7
While currently not being considered in Santa Cruz County, the future possibility of internet voting is a concern due to the inability to ensure the security and anonymity of the vote. Published May 17, 2017 24 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury
No recommendations for this finding
F8
In 2015, 2016, and the first two months of 2017, the SUESD Board minutes did not record that the Board has conducted a self-evaluation.
No recommendations for this finding
F9
The SUESD Board has not reviewed or revised the responsibilities and duties of the superintendent at any time between September 2001 and 2016.
No recommendations for this finding
F10
The SUESD Board has been using an incorrect template for its agenda for at least the past six years.
No recommendations for this finding
F11
The agenda template announces conflicting times for the convening of public meetings.
No recommendations for this finding
F12
The agenda template does not advise the public of its opportunity to pull items from the consent agenda for comment prior to the adoption of the agenda.
No recommendations for this finding
F13
The lack of overnight parking at bus facilities may be a deterrent to potential riders.
No recommendations for this finding
F14
Metro’s CNG bus engines break down sooner than expected, resulting in accelerated expenses.
No recommendations for this finding
F15
Metro transit centers are deteriorating and in disrepair, which may negatively impact ridership.
No recommendations for this finding
F16
Metro transit centers are not clean, which may negatively impact ridership.
No recommendations for this finding

Conclusions 1

Commendations 5

Comments 1

No Responses Found 1

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.

Santa Cruz County County