Score: +2
(2/0/0)
Ventura County Grand Jury
• 2014-2015
Elections and Polling Place Observations
⚠️ 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 27 findings
F01
The Grand Jury visited a widespread and representative sample— approximately 16%—of the polling places in Ventura County. (FA-01, FA-03)
No recommendations for this finding
F02
The Grand Jury visited a widespread and representative sample— approximately 20%—of the precincts in Ventura County. (FA-02, FA-04)
No recommendations for this finding
F03
The training provided to poll workers is comprehensive. The material is too detailed for many first-time poll workers to absorb in a single three-hour training session. (FA-07, FA-09, FA-11)
No recommendations for this finding
F04
The hands-on portion of the training, particularly setting up the AVC Edge equipment, was difficult for some poll workers to absorb in the hands-on portion of the training. (FA-07, FA-09, FA-11)
No recommendations for this finding
F05
Three of the 11 polls where opening was observed were not completely ready for voters at 7:00 AM. In all three cases, there were problems setting up the AVC Edge equipment. (FA-12, FA-13, FA-16)
No recommendations for this finding
F06
Observed poll closings were completed in a timely manner; no voters entered polls after closing. Workers at one site appeared rushed but completed all closing requirements correctly. (FA-12, FA-14)
No recommendations for this finding
F07
Inadequate signage created confusion in some locations where multiple polling places were located in one building, for example, the South Oxnard Library and South Oxnard Center. In this location, there were separate polling places in the north and south ends of the building. The confusion was caused because the South Oxnard Center had ample visible signage but the Library did not. (FA-12, FA-15, FA-16)
No recommendations for this finding
F08
Missing bilingual signage was obvious in a significant number (25%) of polling places visited. (FA-16)
No recommendations for this finding
F09
The inclusion of multiple precincts within single polling places created some confusion on the part of poll workers and voters. In four of the multiple- precinct locations, the voting machines were not separated by precinct or by alphabet, causing ballots to be placed in the wrong Optech Insight (Optech) machine. In some cases the problem was recognized, and poll workers created signage to separate the Optech machines by precinct. (FA-03, FA-04, FA-12, FA-15, FA-16, FA-17)
No recommendations for this finding
F10
In polling places where the AVC Edge was operational and its use was encouraged by poll workers, voters found the AVC Edge to be understandable and easy to use. (FA-12, FA-15, FA-19)
No recommendations for this finding
F11
Variations from normal ballot procedures were understood and handled well in most cases. (FA-12, FA-15, FA-17, FA-18) 6 Elections and Polling Place Observations
No recommendations for this finding
F12
Despite a separation of less than 0.1% between the winner and loser in one race, the losing candidate did not request a recount. This action implies confidence in the County’s voting processes. (FA-25, FA-26)
No recommendations for this finding
F13
The County Elections Division certified the election results 10 days before the required date of December 2. (FA-27) Recommendations
No recommendations for this finding
F14
Grand Jury members observed poll closings at 5 polling locations.
No recommendations for this finding
F15
Grand Jury members observed polling place operations at 43 polling locations during voting hours.
No recommendations for this finding
F16
Based on an analysis of the completed Check Sheets, the top 10 discrepancies noted during polling place visits were (by percentage of polling places visited): 4 Elections and Polling Place Observations Missing signage outside polling places (45%) Missing signage inside polling places (32%) Confusion as to proper precinct where multiple precincts were located in one polling place (30%) Inadequate parking, including handicapped parking (27%) Missing bilingual signage (25%) Missing equipment, mainly pens, in voting booths (20%) Difficulty in some areas, such as setting up the AVC Edge equipment, explaining voter cards, and handling provisional ballots (18%) Improper procedures used in opening polling places, particularly in setting up the AVC Edge and first-voter procedure (18%) Voting booths not correctly set up (16%) Equipment problems with AVC Edge (16%)
No recommendations for this finding
F17
Seven polling locations (16%) had no discrepancies noted.
No recommendations for this finding
F18
Grand Jurors rated most polling places as clean and in good repair, with acceptable lighting and noise levels, properly set up voting booths, readily accessible voting materials, and welcoming and knowledgeable poll workers.
No recommendations for this finding
F19
Use of the AVC Edge machines was very limited; only three polling places visited made more than minimal use of this asset. In several locations observed, this equipment had not been used.
No recommendations for this finding
F20
Of the 43 polling places visited, 24 served multiple precincts: 21 served two precincts, one served three precincts, and two served four precincts.
No recommendations for this finding
F21
A computer malfunction in the counting room delayed tabulation of ballot count until about 9:30 PM, when first returns were posted both electronically and in paper form.
No recommendations for this finding
F22
The County IT Director and his team were on site at the Counting Center to analyze and correct computer problems.
No recommendations for this finding
F23
The County Clerk and Recorder/Registrar of Voters periodically informed the press and public of the status of correcting software problems.
No recommendations for this finding
F24
The vote tabulation system appeared to be working properly by about 10:30 PM Election Night.
No recommendations for this finding
F25
The closest election in the County was for a seat on the Oxnard City Council in which the incumbent won re-election by 10 votes out of 13,350 cast. [Ref-03]
No recommendations for this finding
F26
The unsuccessful candidate in the Oxnard City Council race conceded the election and declined to request a recount on Monday, November 24. [Ref- 03] Elections and Polling Place Observations 5
No recommendations for this finding
F27
The Elections Division certified the election results on Monday, November 24. [Ref-03] Findings
No recommendations for this finding
Commendations 1
-
CM1 Page 10The Grand Jury commends the Ventura County Elections Division and poll workers on Election Day for their hard work and dedication to ensuring that all County voters were afforded the opportunity to exercise their right to vote. The Grand Jury also commends the County Clerk and Recorder/Registrar of Voters for his efforts to certify the election results well in advance of the date prescribed by California Law. References Ref-01. County of Ventura, Office of Mark A. Lunn, Clerk Recorder/Registrar of Voters, Ventura County Election Officer Handbook Gubernatorial General Election November 4, 2014. Ref-02. County of Ventura website, Elections Division, List of Polling Sites with Voting Precincts http://recorder.countyofventura.org/wp- content/uploads/2014/10/podr009_pollsiteswithvotpct.pdf (accessed January 7, 2015). Ref-03. Wenner, Gretchen, “Perello wins Oxnard council seat by 10 votes,” Ventura County Star, November 25, 2014.
Observations 2
-
OB1 Page 3Elections and Polling Place Observations Summary The 2014-2015 Ventura County Grand Jury (Grand Jury), in the course of overseeing the election procedures of the County of Ventura (County), monitored the polls on November 4, 2014 (Election Day), by conducting unannounced observations of polling places in the County, and by observing the County Clerk and Recorder/Registrar of Voters (Elections Division) Central Counting Place in the County Center. In preparation for observing polling places, 12 members of the Grand Jury attended the three-hour Election Officer Training Course (Training Course) presented by the Elections Division. In conducting its observations, Grand Jury members used check sheets to record observations of polling place conditions and poll worker performance. An analysis of these check sheets shows that the Grand Jury rated most polling places as clean and in good repair, with acceptable lighting and noise levels, properly set up voting booths, readily accessible voting materials, and welcoming and knowledgeable poll workers. The Grand Jury found that variations from normal ballot procedures were understood and handled well by poll workers. The Grand Jury commends the Elections Division for its hard work in training poll workers and for providing technical support on Election Day. The Grand Jury commends the poll workers for the long hours they spent ensuring that all County voters were afforded the opportunity to vote. The Grand Jury also commends the County Clerk and Recorder/Registrar of Voters for his efforts to certify the election results well in advance of the date prescribed by California Law. Grand Jurors found the Training Course material to be comprehensive but extremely complex for inexperienced poll workers. During visits to polling places on Election Day, the Grand Jury found that poll workers had difficulty in setting up the AVC Edge equipment, which led to delays in opening some polling places. The Grand Jury observed missing signage, particularly bilingual signage, at several polling places. The Grand Jury also observed some degree of confusion at polling places where multiple precincts were located in a single space; in many cases this was recognized and dealt with effectively by poll workers. The Grand Jury recommends that the Elections Division consider revisions to the Training Course, increasing the length of the course to help ensure that the extremely complex information is understood by all poll workers, especially inexperienced poll workers. The Grand Jury recommends that the Training Course strongly emphasize the need for proper signage, particularly bilingual signage, at polling places. The Grand Jury recommends that the Training Course include additional hands-on training to improve setup and usage of electronic voting machines. For experienced poll workers, the Grand Jury recommends that the Elections Division ensure that the content of online training reflect changes to polling place procedures that have occurred since the last election cycle. The Grand Jury recommends that the Elections Division reduce possible confusion by locating only one polling place in a single building. Where multiple precincts are Elections and Polling Place Observations 1
-
OB2 Page 4located in a single polling place, the Elections Division should take steps to instruct poll workers to clearly separate the precincts and prevent votes from being cast in an incorrect precinct.
Agency Responses 1
Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.