📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report

This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.

Santa Cruz County Grand Jury • 2006-2007

Window Dressing or Effective Oversight? Page 1 - 16

Published: January 23, 2008 193 pages
View PDF View Full Original

Findings 53 findings

F1 Page 28
The case studied involved one company having a large number of parcels and multiple businesses. It was necessary for the assessor, with the property owner’s eventual concurrence, to segregate the parcels and associated improvements and other assets in order to determine which parcels, improvements and other assets were related to the requested assessment reduction. Property Assessment: What’s Business Property Really Worth? - 19 2006-2007 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report with Responses
F2 Page 29
The business associated with the requested assessment reduction in this particular case is relatively unique making the use of “comparables” difficult. The Assessor’s Office, therefore, relied on the Income Method for determining the value of the property.
F3 Page 29
The initial assessment was established using base-year values adjusted per the requirements of Proposition 13 and augmented by annual valuations of equipment. Reductions under the auspices of Proposition 8 were based on multiple factors including the capitalization of the business’ five-year average income stream.
F4 Page 29
A one-year study of the business was conducted by the assessor. Industry experts were consulted to assure the assessor’s understanding of the business and the reasonableness of various valuations.
F5 Page 29
Externally audited consolidated financial reports were used as a starting point for the income analysis. Secondary financial reports, isolating the business associated with the requested assessment reduction from the consolidated financials, were prepared by the property owner.
F6 Page 29
The property owner’s accounting processes, audited consolidated financial reports and breakouts were tested by the assessor’s staff working both at the property owner’s site and in the Assessor’s Office.
F7 Page 29
An agreement stipulating the value of the property in question for tax purposes (Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release) was approved by the Assessment Appeals Board and executed by the property owner and the county.
F8 Page 29
Annual reviews by the assessor of the reduced assessment are being conducted as required. Conclusions
F9 Page 39
The results cartridges for the touch screens and memory packs for the scanners are created on a stand-alone computer at the warehouse. They are then loaded and sealed into the appropriate precinct equipment and stored until ready to be shipped to the polling place. Access to both the warehouse and office are controlled through the use of color-coded security badges. - 6 Electronic Voting 2005 – 2006 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report with Responses Four Elections Department supervisors with the widest access to the county's voting machines and voting materials have their own color-coded badge. Temporary employees, who must be escorted and supervised inside the secure area, have a different color badge, as do permanent Elections Department employees, visitors and exhibitors, and voting machine vendors. Response from the Elections Officer: In addition, entrance into the secured area where voting equipment is stored and programmed is locked in a separate caged facility within the warehouse and entrance is restricted only to three people who have clearance.
F10 Page 40
The warehouse has an alarm system, provided by First Alarm. An access card is required in order to enter. The Information Systems Analyst, Department Information Systems Specialist and the Election Officer have the First Alarm access code. Response from the Elections Officer: Only the County Clerk, Assistant County Clerk and Department Information Systems Specialist have the access code and magnetic card for access.
F11 Page 40
A large door is locked from the inside. All equipment is within a caged area of the warehouse with controlled access. Response from the Elections Officer: In addition, there is 24-hour camera surveillance of the warehouse facility. C. Poll Site Security/Physical Equipment
F12 Page 40
The assigned person at each precinct picks up the voting equipment from the warehouse the day before the election. The cartridges are already in place and sealed. A poll worker takes the equipment home. On election day, they take it to the polling place and set it up. Response from the Elections Officer: We have four distribution centers: the Warehouse, Felton Fire, Aptos Library and Watsonville City Hall. In addition, we deliver equipment and supplies to the Inspectors at our Summit precincts on the Thursday before Election Day.
F13 Page 40
At the close of the polls, two designated persons break the seals on the results cartridge and the memory pack and remove them from the machines. Cartridges and seals are put in a sealable orange bag. The printer is removed from the touch screen machine for transport. The orange bag and printer are prepared by an inspector and a designated person. These items are taken to the election department, where the bags are checked, verified, and stored in the Information Systems Analyst office until ready to tally. The person who checked out the equipment and brought it to the polling site is also responsible for taking it back to the county building. All voting equipment is eventually returned to the warehouse for storage. Electronic Voting - 7 2005 – 2006 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report with Responses Response from the Elections Officer: There are three return centers: The County Government Center, Watsonville City Hall and Felton Fire Station. We are looking into adding more in the future.
F14 Page 41
After the November 2006 election, the above process was reviewed by election staff. It was found that there were delays in equipment check-in. Response from the Elections Officer: In the future, the number of return centers will increase in an effort to decrease the time it takes for poll workers to return equipment and supplies.
F15 Page 41
The issue of fire protection of the polling places was not addressed when the polling places were chosen. Since most poll sites are in public buildings, it was assumed that the fire protection available at the poll site location would be relied on. Response from the Elections Officer: Correct.
F16 Page 50
The strategy to put just one touch screen at each polling place proved to be a good one. It satisfied the requirements for voter accessibility while providing more current technology for voters. The mixture of technology also provided backup. If the printer or other equipment had a problem, voters had another way to cast their votes.
F17 Page 41
Sequoia Systems is a state-approved vendor for the new voting equipment. They were chosen by Santa Cruz County to provide the voting equipment. Response from the Elections Officer: The system is federally-qualified and state-certified. On August 3, 2007, the SOS re-certified the system subject to conditions.
F18 Page 41
The touch screen voting machine has a printer which records the votes. It has 300 feet of paper inside the machine. During the last election, the paper often jammed. Response from the Elections Officer: There were a dozen paper jams on 140 units deployed. Personnel have since been trained to identify and correct most of the paper jamming problems.
F19 Page 41
During the November 2006 election, two or three scanners failed and at least 12 printers jammed. When the failed scanners were tested, it was determined that they probably had been damaged in transport. Response from the Elections Officer: Two scanners were replaced at the beginning of the day due to malfunctions. Processes were in place for replacement equipment to be rapidly deployed. There was no delay in voting. Other scanner problems occurred, but they were operator error and were resolved via phone conversations with trained staff.
F20 Page 41
The 400C Ballot Counter Machine reads the ballots very quickly. However, the catch basket, which is located outside the machine, is not large enough to hold all of the ballots. As a result, ballots can get bent or be ejected onto the floor. - 8 Electronic Voting 2005 – 2006 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report with Responses Response from the Elections Officer: One person operates the 400C while two people collect ballots. This system ensures the least amount of stress on the ballots, so they are easily stored in ballot storage containers. We had 2 ballots fall on the floor and they were retrieved.
F21 Page 42
The results cartridge plugs into touch screen equipment. It contains a database for capturing the votes as they are input by the voter. This cartridge cannot be removed without breaking a seal. Response from the Elections Officer: Correct.
F22 Page 42
The memory pack plugs into the optical scanner. It also uses a database for capturing the votes as they are input when the ballot is scanned. The memory pack cannot be removed without breaking a seal. Response from the Elections Officer: Correct.
F23 Page 42
Firmware (software imbedded in the machine) operates the machines. The Secretary of State demands the firmware be at a specific level (version). It cannot be changed after 60 days prior to election. A test is run to ensure the firmware level (version) is correct. Response from the Elections Officer: Correct.
F24 Page 42
To ensure the reliability and accuracy of the equipment, logic and accuracy testing is conducted by the vendor and county personnel. Some experts believe that this testing is insufficient for validating the accuracy and reliability of the vote. They argue that it consists only of verifying whether the equipment is working. It does not evaluate the equipment’s security. Response from the Elections Officer: Logic and Accuracy tests are done by elections staff and a Logic and Accuracy board made up of people from our community. The vendor is not involved in this test. The test uses ballots, either paper or electronic, where the vote totals are known. The tests are run to ensure that the machines are counting correctly. An observation panel is invited to watch these tests. It is not a security test. Security is achieved through the processes and procedures we have in place as well as meeting the conditions required by the Secretary of State. Equipment security improvements are also being implemented by the vendor. Sequoia currently has voting system upgrades going through the federal qualification process that address identified security concerns.
F25 Page 42
After they are finished voting, voters who use the touch screen equipment can verify the accuracy of their votes by looking at a compilation of their votes that is displayed in a window on the machine. Electronic Voting - 9 2005 – 2006 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report with Responses Response from the Elections Officer: It is displayed on a Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail that is under a window attached to the machine.
F26 Page 43
Following a written procedure, the designated poll worker and one other poll worker break the outer seal and assist the first voter to verify prior to his or her vote that the “total votes” displayed is zero. Both the poll worker and the voter sign an official document verifying that the vote count is zero. Response from the Elections Officer: The zero vote report is verified in writing by the first voter on the touch screen and the first voter who uses a paper ballot that is scanned into the scanner.
F27 Page 43
On 10 percent of machines, a random sample with full paper recount is taken to check that the machines are tallying correctly. Response from the Elections Officer: Correct. SOS conditions require a 100 percent manual recount.
F28 Page 43
After the November 2006 election, Capitola initiated a manual recount. Each precinct was reconciled separately. With approximately 3000 votes to count, it came out to within one vote of the machine count. The final election results did not change. Response from the Elections Officer: There was a recount requested for the Capitola City Council contest as well as the Watsonville City Council, District 5 contest. In both cases, a voter marked a vote on a paper ballot outside of the voting target area so the vote could not be read and tallied by the ballot counters. In both cases, this one ballot did not affect the outcome of the contests.
F29 Page 43
During the November 2006 election, a number of absentee ballots had to be redone due to the types of pens used. Some voters used pens that bled through the paper and could not be read by the scanner. Response from the Elections Officer: Better instruction will be provided to voters in the future. Voters are instructed to use a blue or black ink pen. Pencil also works. But when voters use a Sharpie or felt-tip pen, the mark bled through the back-side of the ballot and resulted in untended votes on contests printed on the back side. A better stock of paper could also help this situation, but could increase postage due to weight. Ballots that had to be remade to reflect voter intent were done so in accordance with the law. - 10 Electronic Voting 2005 – 2006 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report with Responses
F30 Page 44
Provisional ballots were being used for voters who had come to the wrong polling place. Some provisional ballots had to be redone because they were folded the wrong way. Response from the Elections Officer: There are fold marks on the paper ballots. In the future, poll workers will be trained on how to fold the ballot correctly. Ballots that had to be remade to reflect voter intent were done so in accordance with the law.
F31 Page 44
An organized training plan with documentation was provided for the poll workers and inspectors. One person at each polling site was trained and certified to use the machines. There were “rovers” who traveled between polling sites to check on machines and supplies. Response from the Elections Officer: In most cases, there were two people assigned to each polling place who were trained on the machines. In addition, there were two other people one Technical Rover and one Roving Inspector who were assigned a few sites to visit frequently during the day. In one case, one person served in both roles of the Technical Rover and Roving Inspector. The Technical Rover had additional training on how to troubleshoot problems with voting equipment at the polls. The Roving Inspector was trained on overall polling site operations and access issues. In addition, there were Runners at the elections headquarters who were trained to be dispatched where needed.
F32 Page 44
Before the November 2006 election, county staff did a lot of on-the-job training while concurrently preparing for the election because the equipment arrived late. Response from the Elections Officer: Correct. We work under very tight deadlines that cannot be extended.
F33 Page 44
The training documentation from the vendor had to be completely redone because it had to be customized to the design of the Santa Cruz County election model. Response from the Elections Officer: Correct.
F34 Page 44
In the future, the Elections Department plans to create a professional DVD to supplement poll worker training. Response from the Elections Officer: Correct. It is currently in process.
F35 Page 44
Poll workers have documentation binders which have flip charts and checklists. Also, they are trained how to deal with the press and observers. Response from the Elections Officer: Correct. Electronic Voting - 11 2005 – 2006 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report with Responses
F36 Page 45
Poll workers indicated they wanted more “hands-on training” with the machines in addition to having more poll workers trained on the equipment. These machines are sophisticated computer equipment, and if something goes wrong, many poll workers don’t know what to do. (See Poll Worker Survey in the Appendix for more information.) Response from the Elections Officer: The Department offered an open lab from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday – Friday during the weeks prior to the Election with extra hours available in the evening and on the weekend upon request. Election workers were encouraged to take advantage of this extra hands-on training. Many did. In the future, we plan to move this lab to another location and better communicate to our election workers its availability.
F37 Page 45
The physical arrangement of the polling places was similar to past elections. This consistency contributed to a stable atmosphere. Response from the Elections Officer: Correct.
F38 Page 45
The touch screen machine was positioned with the back of the machine to the wall. This placement meant that the voter’s selections could be seen by others standing nearby. Response from the Elections Officer: We wanted to protect the back side of the machine which needs to be manual activated to pull up a ballot. The machines do not lend themselves to be turned around easily. A solution to this issue is being discussed with staff and the vendor.
F39 Page 45
The county was proactive in making the touch screen machine wheel chair accessible by re-engineering the support legs. In addition, they custom designed carrying bags for the scanner. Response from the Elections Officer: Correct.
F40 Page 45
Santa Cruz County was sued by the State Attorney General for not following Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) regulations for polling sites. The parties agreed to settle the lawsuit without finding that the county had violated the ADA regulations. Response from the Elections Officer: Correct.
F41 Page 45
Some polling places that were shared by more than one precinct also shared touch screen machines. This arrangement caused some confusion because voters had to identify which precinct they were voting in as the first step in the voting process, and many did not know. - 12 Electronic Voting 2005 – 2006 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report with Responses Response from the Elections Officer: Our plan is to purchase additional touchscreens and scanners to allow us to assign one of each to each voting precinct. This plan is on hold pending final clarification from the SOS on the conditional certification of the voting equipment and renewal of the Help America Vote Act contract to allow these costs to be covered by the federal funds. It is very possible the additional equipment will not be received in time for February 2008, but we anticipate having them in time for June 2008.
F42 Page 46
In the start-up process for the new voting system, the Department Information Systems Specialist, Elections Officer, Assistant County Clerk and the Information Systems Analyst were trained first, and then they were able to provide training for others. Sometimes training occurred simultaneously with the installation of the new equipment. Response from the Elections Officer: Correct.
F43 Page 46
The staffing for the poll places was conducted in the same manner as in previous elections. Polling place staff is typically temporary help from the community. The polling place supervisors are relied upon to pick up the equipment at the warehouse the day before the election, keep it at their houses overnight and take it to their polling places in the morning for set up. Response from the Elections Officer: We had additional staff at the polls and had the addition of the Technical Rovers. We also rely heavily on county workers to serve in the polls. For the 2008 election cycle, the Board has agreed not to hold board meetings thereby freeing up additional county workers who can serve in the polls.
F44 Page 46
In an effort to educate the public, the Elections Department distributed thousands of voter pamphlets to the public via U.S. mail. The department personnel also gave speeches and distributed educational material at local public schools, bookstores, the Capitola Mall, and the county fair. Media promotion included television and public radio interviews and press releases. Response from the Elections Officer: In addition, a flyer introducing the new voting system was mailed to every registered voter. County Sample Ballots are also mailed to every registered voter in addition to being available on our website at www.votescount.com
F45 Page 46
Despite the education campaign, some voters were confused as to how to mark their ballots. For example, some voters who used the paper ballots did not understand how to connect the arrows to the candidate or issue they were voting on. Electronic Voting - 13 2005 – 2006 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report with Responses Response from the Elections Officer: We found voters were better able to follow this new voting method than when we switched from a punch card voting system to a marking system. Even with the previous Mark-A-Vote ballot, voters often circled choices or made some other mark to make their selections. We continue to try to improve ways to educate voters on how to mark their ballots.
F46 Page 47
In general, voters who used the touch screen machine seemed unaware of the importance of verifying their votes by comparing them with the compilation of their ballot that was visible through a window on the machine. Response from the Elections Officer: It’s hard to say what voters find important. Some voters mark a paper ballot so quickly they fail to vote the back side. I believe all voting takes time, care and consideration and choices whether made electronically or on paper require double checking to ensure the voter marked his/her choices as intended. Certainly checking the paper record on a touch screen unit to confirm the electronic record provides reassurance that the vote was recorded accurately, if the voter wants that reassurance. Poll workers will be asked to remind touch screen voters to verify their votes on the VVPAT.
F47 Page 47
County election officials determined that there would be one touch screen at each polling place. The new scanner would be the main voting machine. They reported that this choice proved to be a good decision. Not only did it provide the necessary accommodations for voters with disabilities, but it also ensured the reliability of the voting process. Having a mixture of technologies ensured that votes could be cast in the event of equipment failures. For example, if the touch screen printer jammed, except for those who are sight impaired, voters had an option to use a paper ballot.
F48 Page 47
A recent news release announced that Florida will shift its voting system to a system of casting paper ballots counted by scanning machines. Several counties around the country will be moving to adopt the touch screen system with the paper trail.
F49 Page 47
On election day, the Grand Jury conducted a two-part poll worker survey and collected 104 surveys for analysis. The first part of the survey covered the poll worker training (see #4 above — Adequacy of Poll Worker Training), and the second part was a critique of the election day process. While most were extremely positive as to the work of the Elections Department, they made substantive recommendations for continued improvement of the elections process including the use and placement of the equipment. [See Appendix for full results of the survey.] - 14 Electronic Voting 2005 – 2006 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report with Responses One hundred and four poll workers out of a total of 917 in Santa Cruz County were surveyed. They were asked to rate aspects of the voting experience from 1 to 5, with five being the best rating possible. The results were as follows: • Training materials: 4.3 • Overall preparation: 4.0 • Adequacy of election day staffing: 4.5 • Ease of equipment set up: 4.3 • Workers indicated they wanted more training on the machines and “hands on” practice.
F50 Page 48
The Grand Jury also conducted exit surveys with 320 voters throughout the county. (The total votes cast was recorded as 50,189 in 170 polling places.) The results of the survey are as follows: • Only about 19 percent of the sample chose to use the touch screen machines. • One hundred percent of those who chose to use the touch screen felt comfortable using it. • Ten percent of those who chose to use the paper ballot with optical scanner felt uncomfortable using it. B. Grand Jury Observations
F51 Page 48
Members of the Grand Jury made general observations while conducting the exit voter and poll worker’ surveys at the November 2006 election. They witnessed the failure of some equipment and agreed with many of the solutions suggested by the poll workers. [See Appendix for more information about the survey.]
F52 Page 48
During the November 2006 election, it was observed that most poll workers gave paper ballots to the voters and did not indicate that the touch screen method was available.
F53 Page 48
It was also observed that not all voters were offered a receipt for voting when they used the touch screen machine. Conclusions

Recommendations 18