2010-2011 Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters Errors in June 2010

Conclusions 4

• CL1 Page 6
  As a result of the mail distributor not following ROV procedure, 7,668 ballots were erroneously mailed to addresses not consistent with ROV records.
• CL2 Page 7
  Adequate measures do not exist to ensure that the mailing vendor updates addresses solely from ROV-received data.
• CL3 Page 7
  Instructions to voters to recast ballots are unclear. The ROV failed to communicate clearly to voters who received improper ballots that their initial ballots were voided. As a result, some voters may not have voted using the correct ballots and remained unaware that their first ballot had been voided. Thus, for some, without their knowledge their votes may not have been counted.
• CL4 Page 6
  The Grand Jury concluded that the bulk mail distributor erred in updating the ROV mailing list through the NCOA list prior to printing and mailing the June 8, 2010 Primary Election ballots. This resulted in 7,668 ballots being mailed out in error. Informed of the mistake, the ROV updated its records and mailed correct ballots as warranted. However, the Grand Jury finds that the communication with affected voters was unclear, and may have resulted in inaction on the voters’ part. In other words, because the ROV’s replacement ballot communication did not clearly state that the ROV had voided the first cast ballot and that a new ballot was required in order for their vote to be counted, the voters may not have returned the new ballot. While the number of ballots erroneously handled is less than 1% of the total vote-by-mail ballots handled, in a close election, such as the Alum Rock Union Elementary School District Board of Trustees where one candidate won by just two votes, every vote matters. While the ROV provides a valuable service for the county in handling the approximately 550,000 registered SCC voters’ requests to vote by mail, the Grand Jury concludes that ROV procedures are not sufficient to prevent erroneous mailing list updates from occurring in the future and recommends action to prevent reoccurrence. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Finding 1 As a result of the mail distributor not following ROV procedure, 7,668 ballots were erroneously mailed to addresses not consistent with ROV records. Recommendation 1A The ROV should review its ballot-handling procedures to ensure the ballot-handling process is fully documented. Recommendation 1B The ROV should ensure the written procedure is attached to or referenced in contracts, communicated with mailing vendors, and re-communicated periodically, depending on change in procedure or change in vendor personnel. 6 Finding 2 Adequate measures do not exist to ensure that the mailing vendor updates addresses solely from ROV-received data. Recommendation 2 The ROV should develop and include within its written procedures a process describing how address changes are to be updated. That process should include safeguards such as a written acknowledgment by the mail distributor that it has updated its mailing list only from the ROV list. The process should require the mail distributor to return a signed form attesting that it followed the written procedure. Finding 3 Instructions to voters to recast ballots are unclear. The ROV failed to communicate clearly to voters who received improper ballots that their initial ballots were voided. As a result, some voters may not have voted using the correct ballots and remained unaware that their first ballot had been voided. Thus, for some, without their knowledge their votes may not have been counted. Recommendation 3A Written communication with voters whose ballots are voided should clearly state that fact. Recommendation 3B For those voters whose initial ballots are voided and who are still eligible to vote, correct ballots should be sent with a letter clearly stating that if they had previously voted on the incorrect ballot that they must vote again using the new ballot enclosed for their vote to be counted. 7 This report was PASSED and ADOPTED with a concurrence of at least 12 grand jurors on this 28th day of April, 2011. Helene I. Popenhager Foreperson Gerard Roney Foreperson pro tem Kathryn Janoff Secretary 8