Santa Clara County Grand Jury
• 2005-2006
2005-2006 Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report Absentee Ballot and Mail-in Voting Processes
⚠️ 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 4 findings
F1
No crosschecking is required to verify that the individuals who register to vote are U.S. Citizens. The entire process is based on an honor system which presumes that an individual will not commit perjury when registering to vote.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
The Board of Supervisors and the Registrar of Voters should request that members of the California State Legislature and U.S. Congress develop legislation which will require new voter applicants to provide proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote. 8
F2
No clearly defined, readily available process exists for registered voters to request termination of their permanent absentee ballot status. The Assistant ROV indicated her office would pursue a more formal approach to allow voters to change absentee ballot status.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
The Registrar of Voters should create an official mechanism to allow registered voters to terminate their permanent absentee voting status.
F3
Different procedures exist for the administration of benefit assessment elections. Under Proposition 218, a sponsoring agency can enter into an agreement with an outside vendor to conduct such elections. Elections can also be conducted by the ROV, or entirely internally by the sponsoring agency. Even though within the law, the latter approach raises concerns about potential conflicts of interest.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
All benefit assessment elections should be conducted by an outside vendor, selected through an RFP process, or by the Registrar of Voters. Whatever the method, elections should be conducted in an open, monitored manner.
F4
The Registrar of Voters is not responsible for conducting Proposition 218 benefit assessment elections directed towards parcel owners. The ROV may be requested to conduct an election by the sponsoring agency, but is not obligated to do so.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
The Registrar of Voters should act as a “center of competency” to provide advice and counsel on best election practices. This role should include coordinating the development of generic RFP guidelines. These should be made available on the ROV web site to all agencies within the County. The web site should also include a portal to previously executed RFPs and qualified vendors. PASSED and ADOPTED by the Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury on this 1st day of March 2006. ________________________________ Thomas C. Rindfleisch Foreperson 10
Conclusions 8
-
CL1 Page 8No crosschecking is required to verify that the individuals who register to vote are U.S. Citizens. The entire process is based on an honor system which presumes that an individual will not commit perjury when registering to vote.
-
CL2 Page 9No clearly defined, readily available process exists for registered voters to request termination of their permanent absentee ballot status. The Assistant ROV indicated her office would pursue a more formal approach to allow voters to change absentee ballot status.
-
CL3 Page 9Different procedures exist for the administration of benefit assessment elections. Under Proposition 218, a sponsoring agency can enter into an agreement with an outside vendor to conduct such elections. Elections can also be conducted by the ROV, or entirely internally by the sponsoring agency. Even though within the law, the latter approach raises concerns about potential conflicts of interest.
-
CL4 Page 9The Registrar of Voters is not responsible for conducting Proposition 218 benefit assessment elections directed towards parcel owners. The ROV may be requested to conduct an election by the sponsoring agency, but is not obligated to do so.
-
CL5 Page 11Flowchart describing the absentee vote process, Registrar of Voters, August 24, 2005.
-
CL6 Page 11RFP # VCD 0001, “Santa Clara County Vector Control District Proposition 218 Assessment Ballot Proceeding and Benefit Assessment Administration Services,” Santa Clara County Vector Control District, March 8, 2005. 3. “Proposition 218 Information Guide,” County of San Luis Obispo Registrar of Voters Office, 2003. Interview
-
CL7 Page 11November 10, 2005, e-mail from City Clerk’s Office, City of Palo Alto.
-
CL8 Page 11January 23, 2006, e-mail from Santa Clara County Counsel’s Office. Meetings Attended
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
Elected County Office