The Kootenai County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC), serving as the statutorily-defined county board of canvassers and the county clerk serving as their secretary, will meet Thursday, November 17, 2011, at 1:30 p.m. to canvass the election returns for all elections within the county precincts. This public meeting is scheduled to be held in the BOCC conference room on the third floor of the Main County Administration Building, 451 Government Way, Coeur d’Alene, ID.
So … who cares? The election is over. Isn’t the election canvass a mere formality, a rubber-stamp action? While that is how Coeur d’Alene’s mayor, city council, city attorney, and the former Kootenai County clerk treated it in the past, the canvass is an important part of the election.
As explained in Chapter 13 of “Election Management Guidelines” published by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission,
This election canvass will be particularly interesting because it is the first time all municipal elections were administered by the county clerk. What he and his staff learned will help prepare them and the BOCC for the November 2012 general election.
In addition to presenting the information the board of canvassers needs to certify the elected candidates, Hayes is expected to discuss some of the challenges presented by this first election under the newly revised state law. His and his staff’s insights along with those of other county clerks throughout Idaho should help legislators determine if election administration laws need further revisions.
There is likely to be some eye-opening information presented at the election canvass, information that will help voters better understand not only the county clerk’s duties administering elections but also our duties as citizens to be informed voters.
The CdA City Council never asked one question…zero…at the canvass of votes after the 2009 city elections, even though Mike Kennedy retained his seat by only 5 votes, and Goodlander by only 29 votes. Remember that, at the same time as CdA’s election, there were elections in Hayden, Fernan and other adjacent cities. There are several “split precincts” where part of the precinct is in CdA and part in one of the other towns, but voters in those precincts all vote at the same location, at the same time. It’s a recipe for error and confusion. Yet our mayor and city council asked NOTHING at the canvass review of the election. They silently nodded their heads and rubber stamped the one-half page summary of the election results.
The subsequent Election Challenge trial revealed a myriad* of problems, all kinds of questionable issues and a number of illegal voters, three of which the judge reluctantly agreed to remove, leaving Mike with a win of only 2 votes.
I am so glad we have a new County Clerk and better safeguards this time!
(*yes, I know myriad is not supposed to have an “of” after it, but I don’t like it that way, it’s awkward, so I use it the way I want.)
Comment by mary — November 16, 2011 @ 9:12 am
Just to let the readers know that if they should choose to attend the meeting, which is open to the public, that the room is very small and most likely would not hold all the government people and the public. Get there early. The BOCC would probably be better served if they had scheduled the meeting in the 1st floor meeting rooms.
Comment by Ancientemplar — November 16, 2011 @ 9:44 am
They didn’t ask any questions for three reasons:
(1) They got the results they wanted.
(2) They were clueless about the reasons for the canvass, and they could not care less about their statutory duties and responsibilities.
(3) They got the results they wanted.
Comment by Bill — November 16, 2011 @ 9:45 am
Ancientemplar,
That’s correct. And there is no sound reinforcement system for the participants.
It’s doubtful they are expecting much of a turnout. Even one of the commissioners thinks attending a different county board meeting is more important than performing her statutory duty as a member of the board of canvassers.
Comment by Bill — November 16, 2011 @ 9:52 am
Yes, Bill, “they got the results they wanted”. But further, I think they didn’t want to bring any attention to the election results, which were embarrassingly close. They didn’t want people to focus on the possibilities of errors that would have turned the results.
Nothing to see here, folks, move on, move on.
Comment by mary — November 16, 2011 @ 10:15 am
Why would the BOCC schedule a conflicting county board meeting?
Comment by Ancientemplar — November 16, 2011 @ 12:02 pm