2004 Ballot Recount: Observer Report

• December 21, 2004:
  Report by Green Party Observer

December 21, 2004:
Report by Green Party Observer

Overall, the Board of Elections of Van Wert County was very cooperative. When we arrived, the poll workers were being given instructions. The ballots had been locked up and sealed when they were brought out of the back room. We all moved into the room where the counting was to take place.

Originally we were told that there would be four counting stations, but there were only two tables set up, one for each precinct counted. There were four poll workers at each table and one observer from each party.

The director explained that the precincts to be counted (Jackson and Van Wert 1D) were chosen at random at www.random.org. The web site chose five and the top two were used to fulfill the three percent. Both precincts had the same candidate order. Nader was still on the ballot, but signs were said to be posted at the polls which instructed people that he was no longer a candidiate. I personally do not remember seeing these signs on election day, but I wasn't looking for them.

Van Wert 1D had one vote for Nader. Van Wert 1D had 460 registered voters, 280 votes.

Jackson had 323 registered voters, 247 votes.

There were no rejected provisional ballots in these precincts.

There were 295 total provisional ballots in the county, 23 rejected. The director was uncertain how many total absentee ballots and stated six or eight were rejected because they were returned after the election. The hand recount of Jackson went smoothly and matched the total from election night. The Van Wert 1D count did not match the first time through. It was counted about three times and then matched.

We then moved back to the tabulator. The deputy director ran the test deck. She stated that the same deck had been run the night before. When it was run through for the witnesses, it matched the numbers from the previous night. Printouts from both runs were set out for us to look through.

When asked if Triad had serviced the machine, the deputy director and a board member stated that they had serviced the machine over the phone via modem on December 9th. The ballots were run through the machine and the Jackson numbers matched. The Van Wert 1D numbers showed an extra vote for Kerry. After recounting the ballots, we found that the undervote in the precinct had become a vote for Kerry. This was agreed upon by all observers. The rest of the precincts were then machine counted.

While the deputy director and a board member ran the rest of the ballots through, the director showed us the poll books for the two counted precincts. The books appeared to be in order, but in a couple places there were names listed without an address or ballot number. When asked, the director stated that this may have occured when someone came in to the BoE to vote after being directed there from the polls.

The director stated that the poll workers were directed to send provisional voters to the Board of Elections if there was a question. She also showed us the rejected ballots while we were waiting for the count. The provisional ballots that were rejected for wrong precinct were unopened. When asked if it was possible the precincts on the envelope were wrong, the director stated that the BoE had problems with that in the past and now instructed the poll workers to call the BoE if they ran out of provisional ballots and not to take from another precinct.

[Editor's note: This rule apparently was ignored in some counties, such as Montgomery.]

There were ten otherwise valid ballots that were rejected as having been cast in the "wrong precinct".

The rejected absentee ballots were also shown to us. There were also several ballots that were not cast because they were taken to nursing homes and the people did not feel up to voting at that time.

As we waited for all the precincts to be completed, we noticed that the poll books had been left out in the open room where we had counted. The room was not located in the BoE, but in the Child and Family Services part of the building. We told the director about the books being left there, but no one went over to get them.

During our entire time at the BoE, the director, deputy director, and the board members present were very friendly and helpful. Most of the things we needed to see were provided without us even having to ask and all questions were answered. The director provided us a list of the provisional voters whose ballots were rejected and the reason why each was rejected. The list does not give an address or phone number for the voters.