Register to Vote - Then Vote*

I agree with and appreciate the finding that the election officer training materials provide clear and in-depth documentation of the requirements for establishing polling places and conducting the elections process. I am respectfully unable to agree wholly with the finding that violations of procedures and noncompliance to guidelines occurred. Although the Grand Jury reported instances on Election Day during which a number of polling place configurations did not follow the Election Handbook guidelines, Elections Division staff did not independently observe these instances and are unable to adequately investigate these occurrences since the specific locations of the polling places were not made available. With more than 1,400 election officers and 350 polling places to oversee on Election Day, Elections Division staff cannot monitor every procedure at each polling place. As such, independent observations by the Grand Jury and other "election observers" are critical to our being able to continually evaluate and improve our elections process and procedures. Elections Division staff and election officer training for future elections will reinforce the importance of the following procedures: posting the Voters' Bill of Rights inside and outside polling places, posting the Voter Register Log outside polling places, situating voting booths to maximize privacy, posting adequate directional signage at polling places, maximizing available lighting at polling places after dark to indicate their location.

I agree with and appreciate the finding that the training materials provided to election workers are detailed and accurate. I respectfully agree partially with the finding that election officer training classes require improvement to emphasize the importance of laws pertaining to elections. All training classes, especially those that teach knowledge and skills that are utilized only occasionally, need to be continually updated and enhanced. Election officer training classes are no exception. Due to the number and complexity of election laws, the three-hour election officer training classes focus on the laws that pertain to issuing, processing, and returning official, Vote By Mail (VMB), and provisional ballots in addition to the set-up and use of the voting equipment machines. These classes detail and emphasize the importance of these laws and each polling place supply kit includes a 57-page Elections Officer's Digest pamphlet that includes the California Elections Code. While election officer training classes are continually improved based on changing requirements and our experience conducting elections, future training classes will emphasize the issues cited, including the importance of laws pertaining to elections, transportation of voted ballots by two election officers, voting booth set up procedures, and polling place signage requirements.

I agree with the finding that, if VBM voters ensure their ballots arrived at the Registrar of Voters prior to Election Day, it will facilitate their ballots being processed earlier and ease the post-election workload. Because the Elections Code allows Vote By Mail ballots to be tallied beginning seven business days prior to the election, the earlier these ballots are returned to the Elections Division prior to Election Day, the fewer Vote By Mail ballots that would remain to be counted as part of the post-election workload.

I agree with the finding that the majority of voter signatures are not verified against voter registration rolls. The majority of voters in Ventura County vote at their precinct polling place; the remaining voters (approximately 46%) vote by mail. By law, voters who vote by mail are required to be verified against their signatures on file when they last registered to vote. Their signatures must match prior to their VBM ballot being counted. To the contrary, voters who cast their ballots at precincts are not required by law to present identification nor are their signatures on the Master Roster verified prior to being allowed to vote. These varying legal requirements result in these two groups of voters being treated differently in terms of identification required in order to vote. I believe a simple legislative solution that would allow all voters to be treated equally and reduce the potential for voter fraud at the polls would be to require all voters - those voting at their precincts and who vote by mail - to present identification prior to being allowed to vote. One of my most important duties is to be vigilant in identifying and preventing areas of potential voter fraud in order to ensure the integrity of the elections process. This legislative change would provide me an additional tool to do so.

I am respectfully unable to agree wholly with the finding that a violation of elections code occurred at one receiving station when election workers were unaccompanied when dropping off ballots. The Grand Jury reported observing eight instances at one receiving station of a single precinct officer dropping off ballot and equipment unaccompanied by a required second precinct officer. The California Elections Code and standard Elections Division practice require that two precinct workers accompany the transport of all voted ballots. Without the benefit of firsthand observation, knowing the location of the specific receiving station and being able to interview precinct workers, it is impossible to determine what occurred at this receiving station. Although only a single precinct officer may have dropped off the ballots and voting equipment, there may have been extenuating circumstances or alternate explanations involving these eight instances that occurred but were not readily apparent to the Grand Jury members at that receiving station. Precinct workers are directed by the Elections Division that an inspector and a clerk are to take the ballots and voting equipment to their respective receiving station at night after the close of polls. Prior to Election Day, the inspector and clerk may have never met. The two precinct workers are encouraged to ride together to the receiving station in the same car and then return to their polling place. However, some precinct workers may feel uncomfortable riding back to an isolated polling place in the dark with only the other precinct worker in the car. One or both precinct workers may feel more comfortable with one precinct worker following the other precinct worker each in their own car to the receiving station. This arrangement allows two precinct workers to deliver the ballots and voting equipment to the receiving station in separate cars. In this case, it is possible many, most, or all of these precinct workers appeared to be unaccompanied when delivering ballots and voting equipment to the receiving station. It is also possible that the two precinct workers arrived in the same car while only one precinct worker dropped off the ballots and voting equipment. Under either scenario, it is possible that the ballots and voting equipment were delivered by two precinct workers but only a single precinct worker was observed by the Grand Jury delivering the ballots and voting equipment. Despite not being able to conclude what exactly occurred in each of those eight instances, Elections Division staff will increase their efforts to ensure that all voted ballots are under observation and accompanied by two persons at all times. Beginning with the November 2011 Consolidated General Election, precinct workers will be reminded during training that two precinct workers must load the ballots and voting equipment into a precinct worker's car and two precinct workers must be identifiable at the receiving station when the ballots and voting equipment are unloaded and the receiving station personnel take custody.

I am respectfully unable to agree wholly with the finding that, in violation of the Election Code Handbook, some polling places had few directional signs and, in one case, no signage, while other polling places did not place voting booths so voters had privacy. Although the Grand Jury reported instances on Election Day in which a number of polling place configurations did not follow the Election Handbook guidelines, my staff did not independently observe these instances nor were they able to adequately investigate these occurrences since the specific locations were not made available. Elections Division staff and election officer training for future elections will provide direction and reinforce the importance of these procedures, including posting adequate directional signage at all polling places and situating voting booths to maximize voter privacy.

I am respectfully unable to agree wholly with the finding that the benefits of Countywide Vote By Mail as the sole electoral process include: (1) eliminate the need for precinct polling places; (2) eliminate the need for precinct workers; (3) eliminate the need for trainers and training classes; (4) eliminate the need for provisional ballots; (5) allow each signature to be verified; (6) establish an accurate Master Voters Roster by having Vote By Mail ballots returned when the name or address of a voter is wrong; (7) increase the number of voters for all elections; (8) reduce errors by having a single voting method; and (9) save money. Similar to most other counties, Ventura County currently utilizes a hybrid voting model to conduct elections: approximately half the voters go to their polling place to vote and the other half vote by mail. With the exception of a limited number of "mail only precincts" (precincts containing fewer than 250 voters in which no polling places are available and all voters vote by mail), voters have historically decided themselves whether they wanted to vote at the polls or vote by mail. Changing this traditional elections model to require that all elections be conducted by mail would significantly alter the existing elections process with some potential benefits being realized and with other potential limitations being experienced. Some of the potential benefits may include: a reduction in the number of precinct polling places and precinct workers, a reduction in the need for precinct worker training, a reduction in the need for provisional ballots, an increase in the number of Vote By Mail ballot signatures that could be verified, an increase in the accuracy of the Master Voter Roster, potential increased voter turnout (based on the experience of other states/counties who have conducted all Vote By Mail elections), and potential for reduced errors by eliminating much of the "human factor" in the elections process. Some of the potential limitations and concerns may include: increased costs (e.g., postage that would be required to be paid for both mailing and mailing back the Vote By Mail ballots, additional temporary help and machinery required to process a doubling of Vote By Mail ballots), additional recruitment and training requirements to satisfy the increased reliance on temporary help, need for increased and scarce facility space as the entire elections process is brought "in house," loss of a treasured American tradition (going to the polls to vote) that is deeply rooted in the freedoms we enjoy and that is currently the choice of more than half of Ventura County voters, and a loss of transparency and personal experience with the voting process as people and neighborhood polling places are replaced with a dependence on machines and central count facilities.