CdA Councilman Ron Edinger
Mary Souza’s Newsletter :
Never before has a local area election been so close, I’m told. Only 5 votes separated incumbent CdA city councilman Mike Kennedy from challenger Jim Brannon. Just 29 votes determined the outcome in favor of incumbent Deanna Goodlander rather than challenger Dan Gookin. And even in normal elections, the 361 vote margin for incumbent Woody McEvers over challenger Steve Adams would be considered quite snug.
So what happens now? The city has to pay for a Recount, if it’s requested by challenger Jim Brannon, because his race was within 1/10th of 1%.
What does a Recount mean? Not what you think, at least certainly not what I thought.
A Recount does not mean a physical hand count of each ballot. No touching, no looking, no hanging chads. (They’re all paper ballots marked with pencil) It does not include a review of the poll books that everyone has to sign before they vote, or an audit of the number of blank ballots given to each precinct, or a comparison to the number of cast ballots in that precinct.
It does not include a review of inappropriate voters. Did you know that people can and do vote Absentee, even though they’ve moved away? They’re not supposed to, but it happens.
Did you know that, in the city of CdA, we have 6 precincts that are “split”, which means part of the precinct is in the city and part is not, so not everyone is allowed to vote in city elections? Sometimes people in split precincts end up voting in elections when they shouldn’t or vice versa. Often, when there are multiple issues on the ballot, these split precincts will have one voting place for city issues and a different place for county (the jail bond), and Fernan even had their city election too, so that precinct was split three ways. This year many of the split precincts had everything all in one place, which caused confusion. Some voters were given the wrong ballots; many folks didn’t understand what they could vote on, or not.
And only FIVE votes made the difference.
A Recount, according to state law, basically means that the same 6,000 ballots are put back through the same counting machine as the first time. With the same people present to do the work, plus a person from the Attorney General’s office, one from the Secretary of State’s office and other interested parties to observe.
The ballots are counted by big digital machines which are quite fast and seem very accurate. I attended the pre-election calibration meeting for the machines on Oct. 30th, where about 15 people, mostly candidates or their representatives, listened to Deedie Beard explain the counting process.
Deedie has worked for the County for 33 years, much of that time running elections, and is planning to retire next month. What a way to go out! I’m sure she doesn’t want a controversy right now, and no one is suggesting one bit of foul play, so I’m confident the Elections Department will clear up ANY questions that could cloud the validity of this election.
And there are many, many questions…stay tuned.
Meanwhile, back at the city council, the incumbents seem to have their sassy attitude back, in full force. The voice of 49.9% of the voters may have fallen on deaf ears. At last Tuesday’s meeting of the council, Ron Edinger had some pointed words for challenger Jim Brannon, regarding a possible Recount. (Remember, it’s Idaho Law that mandates the city pay for recounts in close elections)
Councilman Edinger announced publicly that since Mr. Brannon claims to be “fiscally responsible”, maybe he should pay for half of the cost of the Recount.
Hey, Ron, the guy’s unemployed. Way to step on someone when they’re down.
What an unprofessional slam, once again, from the city council bench! And did Mayor Bloem or any of the other council members speak up about this inappropriate comment? No. Not one.
Has Ron Edinger forgotten that Jim Brannon lost his job as Exec. Director of Habitat for Humanity in the middle of the city council campaign, under highly suspicious political circumstances, just 90 minutes before the televised candidate forum?
Ron Edinger is up for re-election in two more years.
And so it goes, here in the City of Excellence. But please remember the biggest lesson from the election of 2009: EVERY SINGLE VOTE COUNTS.
Have a great weekend! –Mary
*************
Mary Souza is a 22 year resident of CdA, local small business owner and former P&Z Commissioner. Her opinions are her own. To sign up to receive this free weekly newsletter, or the free archive of past columns, visit www.marysouzacda.com Comments can be sent to marysouzacda@gmail.com.
Dan English/Dan of the county; said on the other blogsite that the recount will be by scanner, as provided by Idaho law. He also, said; that the expenses to conduct the recount will only be a little over $1000, because everything else has been paid for. Apparently, the county only has to cover the cost of transportation and housing for two officials from Boise for the most part.
What I still can’t get over is:early on Dan G.had a 8% lead over Goodlander and lost that lead later in the contest. Someone said, that the early precinct tallies were absentee ballots being counted.So,
Goodlander made the difference up with ballots counted from that nights
voting? Does that say that people who vote by absentee ballots are citizens who tend to be fed up with the local gov’t and current city council members?
Comment by kageman — November 13, 2009 @ 2:36 pm
I’ve never seen a local CDA city council election, where all the votes were counted so early. The voting precincts were closed by 8 p.m. and the outcome was decided by 10:30 p.m.If the elections officials can work that fast, there’s no reason why they couldn’t conduct a hand recount in an 8 hour shift from some 6,200 votes.I believe the recount should be conducted by hand.
Comment by kageman — November 13, 2009 @ 2:50 pm
kageman,
Here is a link to an interesting page on the Secretary of State’s website. The page is titled Election Training Reference Manual – Paper Ballot.
The election recount procedure is outlined in Idaho Code.
The process you propose gets into contesting the election. That was the topic of my post titled Upon Closer Examination… on November 5.
Comment by Bill — November 13, 2009 @ 3:53 pm
Kageman, Most people DO think a recount means a hand count and visual inspection of each ballot, but that’s not the case, as I described in my newsletter. More than the ballots themselves, I question the appropriateness of each voter. Voters don’t have to show ID when they sign in to vote, so doesn’t that open things up to all kinds of mischief?
One woman told me her adult daughter used to live here but has now moved away. The woman said she could have voted Absentee using her own name and then gone to the polling place and voted by using her daughter’s name, and no one would have known the difference. (She didn’t do that.) I guess I could have done the same thing too because our daughter also has moved away but is still registered here. (But I didn’t do it either)
Then there are the military Absentee ballots that weren’t sent out in enough time. They’re supposed to have 6 weeks but only had about 3. All kinds of issues…
Comment by mary — November 13, 2009 @ 4:15 pm
“Then there are the military Absentee ballots that weren’t sent out in enough time. They’re supposed to have 6 weeks but only had about 3. All kinds of issues…”
Well, that’s one particularly false rumor one I’m calling foul on.
Our military ballots always go out at the first point our absentee ballots are ready. However filing deadlines are different for city and other local elections vs. federal elections where they must be mailed out at least 45 days early. We go out of our way to do the very best job we can with our military voters.
Two of my adult children are active duty military and have served three tours in Iraq between them. Our youngest son is there now. I take a high degree of personal offense at the implication that we would ever, ever short change our military voters for any reason or play games with their ballots. That’s just plain over the line and without a basis in fact whatsoever.
There are a number of other inaccurate implications in your statement and others I have read but I’m too upset as a Army and Navy father to attempt to address all of them but I’ll mention a few.
In most cases, if people have moved away permanently they don’t still have the right to vote an absentee ballot. However, just because people are on the road, live part of the year in other states, or even other countries that does not mean they automatically lose their right to vote here. There are state and federal laws that govern these situations.
However, if you know for sure someone voted illegally you should report it to the Election’s Office or directly to the Prosecutor’s Office because it should be reported. Idaho does not require voter ID and recounts are by law conducted in the same manner as the original election. While I might agree there could be changes or improvements to our election law that is not something that is decided by the local county clerk or elections department or on an election by election basis. We follow the law as it is. If you believe it should be changed then talk to your legislators. If it is changed we then we will change our procedures accordingly.
Comment by Dan English — November 13, 2009 @ 9:21 pm
Dan English,
Exactly when were the absentee ballots for the November 3, 2009, election mailed out? The Idaho Secretary of State has published the Election Training Reference Manual – Paper Ballot which includes this page. Why does your office or the City deviate from the Secretary of State’s recommendation to allow 45 days (6.4 weeks) for delivery of absentee ballots? Does the mail get delivered faster if it includes absentee ballots for local elections?
Since you profess to be such a champion of the law, I assume your office will cooperate fully and completely and allow any citizens to timely examine poll books, registration signature cards, requests for absentee ballots, and all other documentation associated with this election? And Dan, since you state you follow the law as it is, I suggest you reacquaint yourself with Idaho Code Title 34, Chapter 20. I’m sure Kennedy, Goodlander, McEvers, Bloem, Edinger, Hassell, and Bruning would be thrilled if, instead of following the cited law, people would follow your advice which was. “However, if you know for sure someone voted illegally you should report it to the Election’s [sic] Office or directly to the Prosecutor’s Office because it should be reported.” As an elected public official you should more carefully word your instructions, Dan. Someone reading your advice might conclude you are giving people the wrong information to make it less likely anyone can successfully file a timely complaint to contest the election. I’m sure that wasn’t your intended meaning, but we also call “foul” when people (especially elected public officials) post inaccurate or misleading information on our website.
The election contest law I cited clearly states that any elector in the city can file an election contest complaint about the city election. There is no statutory requirement that any citizen take the preliminary step of notifying your office or the prosecutor if they believe someone has voted illegally. Those notifications will come in due course if an election is contested in the District Court. Someone might get the idea, Dan, that you are trying to misdirect people so they waste days that could better be used examining the records of the election in your office to follow your original suggestion: determining for sure how many people voted illegally in this election. The statute of limitations for prosecuting election law violations (Idaho Code, Title 18, Chapter 23) is much longer than the period allowed for filing a complaint to contest an election. Please be more careful when you state something as fact on our website.
Comment by Bill — November 14, 2009 @ 6:44 am
Dan, I’m surprised at your defensive attitude. As the elected County Clerk, you are in charge of all elections administered by the county, so you should be the local authority on these issues. This was an incredibly close election! Closer than any other has been. When things are that close, every irregularity seems enormous. But what I am looking for from my elected County Clerk, is not an aura of defense but an outreach of cooperation.
My newsletter specifically stated “…no one is suggesting one bit of foul play, so I’m confident the Elections Department will clear up ANY questions that could cloud the validity of this election.” Yet, what you gave in your response was anything but an offer of help. It sounded much more like, “Hey, it’s not my fault!.”
And, as a voter, I don’t agree with your attitude when you wrote:
You may not make the laws, Dan, but your position and title put you in the forefront to help IMPROVE the laws and the system by which our elections are conducted. Have you taken any action to move the legislature toward requiring ID when voting? Have you attempted to detangle the mess of split precincts, perhaps starting with something as simple as special large maps at those polling places?
After 25 years of running a small business, I can tell you that it’s not a matter of whether mistakes are ever made on a job, they happen. But it’s how those mistakes, or what you might call “irregularities” in your business, are handled that make all the difference. In private business, we can’t take a defensive approach…remember, “the customer is always right!” We make things right and fair for the client, then change our system to make sure it never happens again.
That’s what I’m looking for from you.
Comment by mary — November 14, 2009 @ 8:49 am
Mary,
Your question to Dan Enlish “Exactly when were the absentee ballots for the November 3, 2009, election mailed out?” is an excellent question. I, too really want to know the answer.
The following absentee ballot information is from the City of Coeur d’Alene Election web site posted by Susan Weathers: “It is anticipated that absentee ballots will be available beginning two weeks prior to Election Day.”
The above city web site statement anticpates 14 days. If this is the case, then some ballots may not reach the military in an appropriate amount of time. Perhaps Mr. English is calling “foul” a little too soon.
I also question the practice of not asking for voter ID. This practice allows another person to vote in place of someone who may be away from the country, who may be on vacation, locked up in jail and so on. Looks likes some practices have loop holes.
This past election gives everyone a good opportunity to discuss the system.
Comment by LTR — November 14, 2009 @ 1:17 pm
Yes, LTR, me too. Paging Dan English…Dan? We would love to have a discussion here that includes your information!
Comment by mary — November 14, 2009 @ 1:46 pm
LTR,
Hey, wait a minute! That was my question. I only come up with a good question every few months and you’re trying to give Mary credit for it? Remember: I’m Bill – she’s Mary. I’m the one wearing the headphones – Mary’s the one with the parrothead balloon on her head. (Just in case you think I’m genuinely offended, I’m not. Thanks for commenting.)
Comment by Bill — November 14, 2009 @ 2:36 pm
He’s just jealous of my balloon hat!
Comment by mary — November 14, 2009 @ 2:44 pm
Hello Bill,
Your awesome. Thank you so much for the gifts of your time and energy that you give to our community.
Mr. English wrote in the other paper that he was taking the rest of the weekend off from election stuff. I don’t blame him a bit. Hopefully, he will give us more details on Monday.
Comment by LTR — November 14, 2009 @ 3:59 pm
Mary,
I am not jealous of your balloon hat. Well, maybe just a little…
LTR,
Thank you. Usually when someone says something about me that starts with “Aw…” it ends another way. Then ten of their attaboys get wiped out.
Comment by Bill — November 14, 2009 @ 4:29 pm
So now, I’m told, the Spokane gossip blog is going on and on about our questions for Dan English! They are suggesting that we think Dan and his staff PURPOSEFULLY delayed sending the military absentee ballots.
Of course, this is totally untrue. NO ONE has suggested any such intent.
My Newsletter, above, clearly states: “…no one is suggesting one bit of foul play, so I’m confident the Elections Department will clear up ANY questions that could cloud the validity of this election.”
My post here on Nov. 13th said “Then there are the military Absentee ballots that weren’t sent out in enough time. They’re supposed to have 6 weeks but only had about 3.”
That’s all I said about it. Bill posted the link to the Secretary of State’s Election Training Manual.
Wow, we didn’t say anyone did anything on purpose. We didn’t even get into any name-calling or personal attacks like they do hourly on that gossip blog. But they will continue to change the facts to fit their need for salacious pandering.
Comment by mary — November 16, 2009 @ 1:17 pm
Meanwhile, we are still waiting for our elected County Clerk, Dan English, to come back on THIS site and share information on this subject. We want him to know the rumors from the gossip blog are untrue: We’re not accusing anyone of anything. And we don’t mind if he doesn’t agree with our level of concern, but we know he is fully capable of discussing these issues in a responsible, respectful manner, and so are we.
Dan?
Comment by mary — November 16, 2009 @ 1:24 pm
Mary – what they are doing “over there” is a crime. The energy and the time they take to destroy your credibility and reputation is amazing. However,the condom master over there is very good at what he wants to “imply” without actually saying it – he leads the puppets forth to author another bevy of posts that read like the 5th grade class bully wrote them. Implying that someone is “delusional” or mentally ill by having your medical insurance cover some “screws” is not only mean, it is offensive to many who are actually ill. I wonder what Mike Kennedy’s aunt would think of some of this behavior if they called/implied that she was crazy or delusional? It is a terrible way to attack people and it appears that this particular blog enjoys making these types of very harmful insinuations. I doubt very much if any of them could tell you that stuff to your face.
Someone needs to slap a muzzle on some of those folks who enjoy hurling insults with no fear. I believe all it takes is 88 bucks to file a libel defamation suit. I would personally serve them for you – for free.
One particular poster wrote a very nasty post about me that some might “beleive” as fact and it was very defaming. He knew better but he could not resist the attack and to think I was the one who introduced him to the “gossip” blog and had his blog recognized. I even designed his first avatar for posting, it was animated. I was trying to help a kid who enjoyed writing – not a pompous badmouth. Anyway, it did not take long for the condom master to use his delete button when we set the record straight. He does know how to use it when something reeks of libel. Also, make no mistake – if any of that garbage they say about you was written about me, I would sue and the beauty of that statement is many folks know I would and I bet before it ever went to court,I would have an apology.
Comment by Stebbijo — November 16, 2009 @ 2:15 pm
Thanks for your support, Stebbijo. The bottom line is that “they”,(whomever might be a critic at city hall or over on the gossip blog–which are often the same people) can say anything about me/us, but that doesn’t make it true. Their attacks are personal because they CAN’T and WON’T address the issues we bring forward.
I am fortunate to have the love and support of a great husband and family, along with many friends who know me well and actually think I’m a nice person!
Comment by mary — November 16, 2009 @ 3:31 pm
Mary,
In reference;
“I am fortunate to have the love and support of a great husband and family, along with many friends who know me well and actually think I’m a nice person!”
You’re darn tootin’!!
Comment by Will Penny — November 16, 2009 @ 9:18 pm
A very nice person, indeed.
Comment by Gary Ingram — November 16, 2009 @ 9:38 pm
Thanks, guys!
Comment by mary — November 17, 2009 @ 8:11 am
Concerning Mike Kennedy’s inquiry about a recount to the state AG’s office.I have a theory about his inquiry. Maybe, Mike thought that if he could get the ball rolling on the recount and it was conducted on his dime and he still won election for a CDA city council seat. It would be harder to contest the election through the District courts. So,Mike has at least considered that Brannon may opt to contest the election outright IMO.
I looked in the paper and Brannon has yet, to ask for a recount and were going on day 8, of 20 days to ask for one.
Comment by kageman — November 17, 2009 @ 10:10 am
kageman,
The recount action is completely separate from contesting the election. Having the same people run the same ballots through the same machines and expecting a different result is pretty close to Einstein’s definition of insanity.
Comment by Bill — November 17, 2009 @ 11:01 am
Bill, I know it’s completely separate. I’m just trying to guage the actions of Mike and Jim. At this point it seems as if all legal options are being considered.
I agree, that it’s insane to do the recount using the same methods, with the same procedures and with the same people. That’s why a hand recount of all ballots would be a more fair process. Idaho laws to be revised concerning recounts IMO.
Comment by kageman — November 17, 2009 @ 12:06 pm
kageman,
I meant no offense, but you would be surprised at the number of people who continue to confuse “recount” with “contest” even after it has been explained to them.
Comment by Bill — November 17, 2009 @ 1:19 pm
Instead of focusing on what’s best for the City and County what’s best for Dan English.
Tote-a-Vote is a family business located in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho. Tote-a-Vote was founded by Dan English. Dan is the elected Clerk of Kootenai County and is a C.E.R.A. graduate of the Election Center. http://www.toteavote.com/contactus.html
Oh yes Tote-a-Vote has done business with the Kootenai County Elections department and this servers email address is used for County business by his deputy clerk I imagine when they don’t want a record of it on the Counties server. There is some credibility for you!
Comment by Appalled — November 19, 2009 @ 3:26 pm