Problems with e-voting contractor

In the article regarding Elections Systems and Software, The City’s voting system provider being denied state certification, a statement was made that the Board of Supervisors did not approve the contract with Sequoia (a competitor of ES&S) because of the high cost, the potential for the equipment to become obsolete, and the company’s refusal to grant public access to source codes (“S.F. may have to wait for e-voting,” May 18).

In response, I would like to point out the following: First, in his Feb. 6 memo to the budget analyst, Director of Elections John Arntz stated that the cost of a new contract with ES&S would be $13.9 million, compared with a lesser cost of $12.6 million for a contract with Sequoia. Furthermore, by granting an extension with ES&S, instead of approving a new contract with Sequoia, we are at risk of losing almost $6 million in federal and state funding not to mention potentially being burdened with a hand-count estimated to cost $1 million.

Second, the equipment we are using from ES&S is outdated and does not meet federal standards, whereas the equipment from Sequoia would have been modern, certified, and not at risk of becoming obsolete for years.

Lastly, our contract with ES&S does not provide public access to source codes. In fact, ES&S and Sequoia have both refused to provide public access to source codes, citing security and intellectual property concerns echoed by California Secretary of State Debra Bowen. The Board of Supervisors erred when it extended the ES&S contract. Without immediate, dramatic and likely impossible improvements, we will be left with an uncertified system and forced to pay for an expensive, drawn-out hand-count this November.

Sean R. Elsbernd

Supervisor, District 7

The City

How to fix parking

As soon as our mayor finishes his first “City That Knows How” project — fare-free Muni — I’ll want him to start on the second. Namely, “Parking-Ticket-Free Parking.”

Rip out the parking meters (sell them in the City Hall store). Go with parking zones and DPT readers running one-hour loops. Their computers will record who is where, when. Any fraction of an hour is paid at the hourly rate. Bill by mail.

Charge 50 bucks to retrieve an illegally parked towed car — $25 for The City; $25 for the bounty tow. Give a $25 parking credit to the cell phone that calls it in. Make vanishing cars so real that citizens won’t go there. Scooters and motorcycles park free.

Paul Burton

The City

Bus shelter politics

I was very proud of San Francisco when it passed the “Sweatfree Contracting Ordinance” that prevents our local government from purchasing goods produced in sweatshops that refuse to meet minimum standards for wages and working conditions for their employees.

That’s why I was so dismayed to learn last week that San Francisco is considering giving a contract for new transit shelters to Cemusa — a wing of the huge multinational construction company Fomento de Construcciones y Contratas.

We know all too well the damage these multinational conglomerates do throughout the world as they exploit workers and strip natural resources — and any hope for a future — from struggling communities. Bechtel Corp., one of the worst, is headquartered right here in our own backyard.

Much was made in the last election of San Francisco values. Surely those values include a respect for the rights of other communities and a willingness to stand up against the use of our local resources to further discrimination and exploitation around the world.

I urge our local leaders to live up to the spirit of our Sweatfree Contracting Ordinance — and our San Francisco values — and disqualify Cemusa from this multimillion-dollar contract.

Manish Patel

The City

Poor John

My definition of a liberal is someone who loves to be compassionate with someone else’s money. John Edwards is therefore the poster boy for liberalism — multimillion-dollar mansion, making $500,000 at a hedge fund to learn about poverty and now a $55,000 speaking fee from a public university to speak about poverty.

If Mr. Edwards truly cared about poor people, rather than portraying himself as an advocate of the poor to drum up votes, he would forego his lifestyle of opulence and narcissistic indulgence, lead a modest lifestyle with $20 haircuts and commercial flights and give his vast fortune to charity.

But I guess for John Edwards, charity begins at home. Ditto for Diane Feinstein and Nancy Pelosi, if you happen to drive by their mansions in Pacific Heights.

Richard Beleson

The City

To add your voice-

By e-mail: letters@examiner.com

By mail:

Editorial Page Editor

The Examiner, 450 Mission St.

San Francisco, CA 94105

By fax: (415) 359-2766