Election (not quite) in the bag
Article History
There are updates to this article.
Elections worker Robert Lacoste processes absentee ballots Tuesday, the only results released by the elections department.
(Cindy Chew/The Examiner)
Elections worker Robert Lacoste processes absentee ballots Tuesday, the only results released by the elections department.

SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) - Although Mayor Gavin Newsom is the presumed to be the winner of this election — even by his political rivals — a complete tally of votes is not expected for several weeks, due to problems with San Francisco’s voting machines.

Newsom had the advantage of being the incumbent, the strength of $1.8 million in campaign contributions and political clout unmatched by any of his challengers. The mayor was also reassured by poll numbers that highlighted his popularity with a majority of San Franciscans, despite scandalous revelations earlier this year that he has problems with alcohol and had an affair with his appointment secretary, the wife of his then-campaign manager.

As of Tuesday night, only 44,472 ballots had been counted — those cast by absentee prior to Election Day. Of those cast, 77.4 percent were in Newsom’s favor, with Republican candidate Harold Hoogasian trailing far behind in second place with 7 percent of the votes.

The remainder of the votes will be counted in the days and weeks to come through a slow and painstaking process mandated by the state.

San Francisco elections officials learned in September that The City’s electronic voting machines would only be certified for limited use because state testing revealed that ballots marked with lighter inks were at risk of not being counted.

As a result, the 561 machines at the polling sites are not being used to tabulate votes, in accordance with orders from Secretary of State Debra Bowen, who oversees California’s elections. Instead, all of the precinct ballots must be transferred to City Hall to be visually inspected and then fed through a central voting system.

Further slowing down the count, The City’s election workers are required by the state to fill out, or “remake” a new ballot when a San Francisco voter — who is allowed to rank up to three candidates for the same local office — leaves one or more of the slots blank.

According to John Arntz, the head of The City’s elections department, ranked-choice voting in San Francisco has always resulted in ballots being kicked out as “undervotes” when three choices are not ranked. But in the past, election workers have visually inspected such ballots and then put them back through the machine.

This year, because undervotes are also caused by marking the ballot with an inappropriate pen, the state is requiring a remake of the rejected ballot, using the pen provided with the machines — in case the ballot was also kicked out due to the ink, Arntz said.

Arntz said that although the goal is to have 75 percent of the precinct ballots and 65 percent of the absentee ballots counted by Friday, if the polling place “require a lot of remakes, then we won’t make it.”

City election workers will count ballots 24 hours a day and a cumulative tally of results will be reported once a day until all the ballots are counted. By law, election results must be filed within 28 days.

The Examiner first reported the potential disaster in May, shortly after the secretary of state sent a letter to The City’s electronic voting machine provider, Election Systems and Software to say her office would not certify The City’s voting equipment.

Earlier this year, a decision made by the Board of Supervisors resulted in an extension for the ES&S contract instead of an approval of a $12.6 million, four-year contract with Sequoia Voting Systems. At the time, some supervisors said they didn’t want to get locked into a new contract because they had questions about the transparency of the electronic voting machines.

beslinger@examiner.com


Name
Comments

characters left


Comments from Examiner Readers

12:45 PM MST on Wed., Dec. 5, 2007 re: "Election results still unofficial"

Jack Kirkpatrick said:
It is Wednesday, December 5, 2007 and the November 6, 2007 results are not in? The First Committee on Vigilance should reorganized to combat the Sidney Ducks, aka The Miscreant...; here the ancient story takes a new turn toward modernism. Instead of stealing a small safe from a Long Wharf shipping office our voters are held hostage to an uncertified election. The S. F. election office is calm throughout this ordeal. Ducks expected a rescue party - California Department of State's Debra Bowen -that never materializes and without her assistance the inevitable happened; the election officials "ducks" and we are still without certified election results. The real story of 1851 is a parody; it was probably was not even an election year except for vigilantes, but we were admitted to the Union by then; somebody got that right thanks to the gold rush! Save some of that gold for electronic counting machines offering a paper trail; the Duck's won't have to take cover from the electorate

112 agree | 114 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

5:16 PM MST on Fri., Nov. 30, 2007 re: "Only 30,000 ballots left ..."

Examiner Reader said:
Why are all the opensourcers trashing Sec Bowen and Steven Hill? Why is this a zero-sum game to these techkys? It sounds to me like a few folks didn't get their way and want to derail the rest of our atempts to have a IRV system that works.

116 agree | 117 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
8:42 AM MST on Thu., Nov. 29, 2007 re: "Election count may end today"

No on H said:
I can't believe that anyone is still willing to support the BOS decision to giving ES&S an extentions. Shame on you!

130 agree | 112 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
8:27 AM MST on Wed., Nov. 14, 2007 re: "Only 30,000 ballots left ..."

Voter said:
At least when the votes and results are announced, we will know that they are accurate. Much better than getting innacurate or hacked votes immediately. Let Debra Bowen do her job. She's proven time and again that an honest, fair and transparent election is what she's working toward. Supervisors might not like it, other county officials might not like it, but the citizens and voters should tell them to get with the Secretary of State's program.

129 agree | 133 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
12:55 PM MST on Tue., Nov. 13, 2007 re: "Only 30,000 ballots left ..."

Examiner Reader said:
Can't we have both: a system that is certified and work, which also provides IRV?

138 agree | 144 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
12:23 PM MST on Tue., Nov. 13, 2007 re: "Pundits deem city election predictable"

Examiner Reader said:
once again, the pack of self righteous "activists" like Steven Hill and the progressives forced on us a failed voting process, and tried to change the rules to benefit their candidates...and it FAILED....and now theyr'e actually lobbying AGAINST FAIR VOTING MACHINES just because it hurts their precious IRV. Newsom is no great mayor but I'm glad he won just so the regressives like Chris Daly will see their stupid ideas stopped with a nice big veto!

169 agree | 148 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
9:22 PM MST on Mon., Nov. 12, 2007 re: "Only 30,000 ballots left ..."

Examiner Reader said:
It look's like we have a chance to fix our problems this Wednesday when San Francisco finally votes for a new system...anyone want to make odds that our Board of Supervisors will screw this up again?

147 agree | 126 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
12:12 PM MST on Mon., Nov. 12, 2007 re: "Only 30,000 ballots left ..."

Examiner Reader said:
What we need is for our Board of Supervisors to stop playing Secretary of State. Can we please let Debra Bowen do her job and give San Francisco a voting system that is certified and works!

162 agree | 165 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
6:15 PM MST on Wed., Nov. 7, 2007 re: "Parking measure losing out; 'Question Time' up in air"

Examiner Reader said:
This is a real bummer - I resent anyone tampering with my ballot, remarking it to their liking. I have a God-given right not to give three preferences, and nobody has the right to add a third preference on my behalf. This system is pure, unadulterated baloney, if not to say voter fraud. The ballots should be tallied by another machine at City Hall, and only if there is a difference between the precinct's machine and the one at City Hall should there be a visual evaluation of the ballots. This sounds to me to be another encroachment upon our voting rights. And the fact that poll workers are not required to check voter IDs makes it a shameful sham anyway.

154 agree | 173 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
3:40 PM MST on Wed., Nov. 7, 2007 re: "Election (not quite) in the bag"

Examiner Reader said:
Great news, another 4 years of serious hair-product and Newsom-speak. Maybe this election result says more about the current nature of the electorate in San Franciso than the Mayor's effectiveness? Seduction can be an amazing quality.

140 agree | 142 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
2:45 PM MST on Wed., Nov. 7, 2007 re: "Election (not quite) in the bag"

Examiner Reader said:
Why the emphasis on "speed"? Accuracy is what people want.

157 agree | 150 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
11:28 AM MST on Wed., Nov. 7, 2007 re: "Low turnout could have rippling effects"

Examiner Reader said:
To the Examiner Reader who wrote: We need to have more great leaders, like Norton the First, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico. Today we have: Supervisor Chris Daly, Activist for Renters, Protector of Progressives, and Advocate for Justice in the Tenderloin.

157 agree | 140 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
10:17 AM MST on Wed., Nov. 7, 2007 re: "This election (not quite) in the bag"

Examiner Reader said:
The reason why we have no election system in place is because Chris Daly tabled the new vendors’ contract after being heavily lobbied by open source activists. The same activists are supported financially by a company called Open Voting Solutions who have sent several un-solicited bids for a system built in a garage by some open source hobbyists. What we need is a system approved and endorsed by Debra Bowen, not some tech geek’s weekend distraction project.

160 agree | 157 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
9:41 AM MST on Wed., Nov. 7, 2007 re: "This election (not quite) in the bag"

Examiner Reader said:
Asking city departments to met goals. Wow, is the Mayor actually grading this crummy voting system. I thought I lived in a world class city. Maybe I should be asking for a tax refund based on poor performance. I will be waiting for my check.

181 agree | 158 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
8:59 AM MST on Wed., Nov. 7, 2007 re: "This election (not quite) in the bag"

examiner critic said:
Good job Bonnie. The chroni-cle sounds like a Newsom sound-bite.

154 agree | 152 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
8:57 AM MST on Wed., Nov. 7, 2007 re: "This election (not quite) in the bag"

Examiner Reader said:
We need to have more great leaders, like Norton the First, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico.

155 agree | 161 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
 
 

(page generated in 0.13 seconds)