One Final Embarassment for Denver Election Commission
Let's all cross our fingers and make a wish, shall we?
Let's hope that the city never sees a more inept agency than the Denver Election Commission (DEC).
You might remember the DEC as being responsible for completely botching both the primary and general elections last year. They did such a poor job running Denver's election that voters decided in January to just disband the whole motley crew. The May election will be the last one overseen by the DEC, and they seem determined to go out with a bang. And by 'bang,' I mean 'embarrasing final act.' As The Denver Post reports:
he Denver Election Commission has scrubbed more than 100,000 residents from the active voter list since November, creating one of the smallest such lists in recent years. The move was in compliance with state regulations, officials said, but it is significant as the city heads into its first municipal all-mail-ballot election. The change does not purge registered voters. However, only "active" voters will automatically receive ballots when the city sends them out early next month. Active voters are people who voted in the last general election - in other words, last November. Councilman Doug Linkhart took issue with the move Tuesday, given what he called "extreme problems" during the November election. "To slap people in the face once in November, and then to come back and slap them again by not mailing them a ballot - I think that's too bad," Linkhart said during a meeting with Election Commission officials. Denver voters stood in line Nov. 7 for up to three hours, primarily because of problems with the software used to check in voters. The trouble was a major factor in the successful campaign to scrap the Election Commission in favor of an elected clerk and recorder. The May 1 municipal election will be the last run by the commission. Voters will elect a clerk and recorder as well as council members, the city auditor and the mayor. The last day to register to vote is Monday. Linkhart suggested the city mail ballots to the 287,000 active voters from the November election, instead of the updated list of 184,000. But Election Commission executive director John Gaydeski said Denver's voter list needed to be updated... ...Assistant City Attorney David Broadwell said the commission had followed the law. "Everybody who was on that voter registration list in November who didn't vote got a card saying 'you've been moved to inactive and if you want to restore your status, come back in and tell us that,"' he said. He noted that any registered voter who does not receive a ballot can request one. But he acknowledged that he, too, had been curious about the low number of active voters. He said the 184,000 ballots "may be the least number that we have mailed out in a mail-ballot election."I really don't even know what else to say about the DEC at this point. There's nothing wrong with doing a purge of inactive voters; every county does it on a regular basis, because people move or just don't vote, and it gets expensive to mail ballots to people who won't even open them. But when you do a purge that eliminates nearly half of the voters from your list, then something isn't right. Most counties do a purge that takes into account more than one recent election; if you miss more than one election, perhaps you are inactive, but missing just the most recent election doesn't prove anything. Maybe you were out of town that day. Linkhart's point is dead-on in this case. Many people couldn't vote on Election Day last November because of long lines and assorted other problems. If they couldn't vote, it was because the DEC screwed up. And now the DEC is saying that people who didn't vote in November - because of their mistakes - won't get a ballot automatically because they didn't vote. Yeah, that makes sense. The positive outcome here is that voters can feel like they made the correct decision in January in choosing to get rid of the woefully inept DEC.
Comments
Submitted by Elevated Voices - Denver Election a Yawner (not verified) on Wed, 2007-04-11 09:49.
[...] and Greg Rasheed. Most of the discussion involving the Denver election has been about the failures of the Denver Election Commission. The only interesting thing that has happened involving a candidate w [...]
Submitted by Jason Bane (not verified) on Tue, 2007-04-03 12:58.
I guess I needed to be more clear. You can mark them 'inactive,' but that doesn't mean that you shouldn't include them in an all-mail election. The DEC should still mail ballots to people who voted in recent elections but only missed the November election. This isn't a big deal unless it's an all-mail election, where most people ASSUME they are going to get a ballot since they voted regularly in the past.
Submitted by Lisa Jones (not verified) on Fri, 2007-03-30 14:48.
Sorry, Jason. It's Colorado law. Denver was able to bypass it by ordinance for the January special election, but not for the May election.
C.R.S. 1-2-605. Canceling registration.
(1) (a) Any county clerk and recorder communication by mail with all active registered electors shall be in the form of an elector information card, including but not limited to the registered elector's name and address, precinct number, and polling place, and shall be mailed by forwardable mail to the elector's address of record unless the elector has requested that said card be sent to his or her deliverable mailing address pursuant to section 1-2-204 (2) (k).
(b) For all electors whose communication pursuant to paragraph (a) of this subsection (1) is returned by the United States postal service as undeliverable at the elector's voting address, the county clerk and recorder may mark the registration record of that elector with the word "Inactive".
(c) All electors whose communication pursuant to paragraph (a) of this subsection (1) is not returned to the county clerk and recorder as undeliverable shall be deemed "Active", and no mark shall be made on the electors' registration records.
(2) A registered elector who is deemed "Active" but who fails to vote in general election shall have the elector's registration record marked "Inactive (insert date)" by the county clerk and recorder following the general election.
(3) Any registered elector whose registration record has been marked "Inactive" shall be eligible to vote in any election where registration is required and the elector meets all other requirements.
(4) Any "Inactive" elector shall be deemed "Active" if:
(a) The elector updates the registration information with the county clerk and recorder; or
(b) The elector votes in any election conducted by a county clerk and recorder or any election for which the information has been provided to the clerk and recorder; or
(c) The elector applies for an absentee ballot for any election which the county clerk and recorder conducts, regardless of whether or not the ballot is returned; or
(d) The elector completes, signs, and returns a confirmation card.
Submitted by Jason Bane (not verified) on Fri, 2007-03-30 14:01.
The DEC is required by law to scrub their voter list. They are NOT required by law to scrub the list based on just one election.
Submitted by Jason Bane (not verified) on Fri, 2007-03-30 13:59.
What I'm saying is that it would make sense to make a voter inactive if they haven't voted, say, since 2003. What the DEC has done is like saying if I don't pick up my mail one day, then I must have moved.
My grandmother, for example, has voted in every general election in the last decade except for in November, because she didn't know where to go. Missing ONE election doesn't make you inactive. There are a lot of people like my grandmother who would expect to get a mail ballot because they have always voted, save for November, only now they have to specifically request a ballot.
People who haven't voted in several consecutive elections should absolutely be deemed inactive. But the key word is 'several,' not 'one.'
Submitted by Jason Bane (not verified) on Fri, 2007-03-30 13:48.
Yes, I do understand the difference, thank you. But the DEC doesn't have to scrub the list based on just one election. Many counties move voters to inactive when they haven't voted in SEVERAL consecutive elections. It's wrong to make someone inactive based on just one Election Day, particularly when that election was botched to begin with.
Submitted by Lisa Jones (not verified) on Fri, 2007-03-30 13:42.
So...you're saying it would make more sense if the DEC refused to comply with state law regarding Denver's voter list?
The DEC didn't delete voters from the rolls, they inactivated them. Do you understand the difference?
http://denvergov.org/redirect_404/tabid/424457/Default.aspx?
"There are several ways in which a voter may become classified as inactive:
-If mail addressed to the voter from the Commission is returned as undeliverable, or
-If the Commission receives notice from the Postal Service or Department of Motor Vehicles that the voter has changed his or her address, or
-If the voter fails to vote in a General Election.
"Once the voter is classified as inactive, the Commission must mail the voter a confirmation card and the voter must fail to activate his or her record (which is done by voting or corresponding with the Commission within the period covered by two General Elections). After the voter fails to vote in a second General Election, his or her name may then be removed from the voter registration rolls."
The DEC is following the law, Jason. There would be something to squawk about if they weren't.
Submitted by Jason Bane (not verified) on Fri, 2007-03-30 09:17.
There's nothing wrong with cleaning up the voter list, but you absolutely shouldn't do it based on who voted in the flawed November election. That makes no sense.
Submitted by Lisa Jones (not verified) on Wed, 2007-03-28 15:48.
You're forgetting, I guess, that Stephanie O'Malley is currently a member of the DEC and is responsible for maintaining Denver's voter list. After the May vote, she will be the top election official in the city.
Getting rid of the DEC won't get rid of O'Malley, and it won't get rid of Denver's voting problems, which are complicated and long-festering. O'Malley has a thankless job in front of her.
Cleaning up the voter list was one thing the DEC has done right lately. The task was long overdue.
