LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for MUNINET Archives


MUNINET Archives

MUNINET Archives


MUNINET@LIST.UVM.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

MUNINET Home

MUNINET Home

MUNINET  January 2005

MUNINET January 2005

Subject:

Re: Secretary Election Proposals

From:

joyce <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Vermont Municipal Government Discussion Network <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 27 Jan 2005 13:44:58 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (349 lines)

Bobbi, I agree with your response wholeheartedly!

Joyce Mazzucco
Randolph Town Clerk & Treasurer

-----Original Message-----
From: Vermont Municipal Government Discussion Network
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bobbi Brimblecombe
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 12:58 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Secretary Election Proposals

Deb,

After reading the proposals and Donna Kelty's responses, I have to agree
with her concerns about same-day voter registration.  We all know that
it
is human nature to procrastinate, and I am afraid that people will see
no
reason to register in advance if they know they can wait until election
day.  Why would they bother to register early if they are going to come
to
the polls anyway?  In Marshfield we had very few problems on election
day,
other than the waiting, and we were able to deal with all but one of the
problems that came up (and that voter had moved to another town several
years ago, and been removed from our checklist voluntarily).  If we have
same-day registration, people will be forced to wait longer at the polls
-
I don't see a way around that.  Even if we have a table set off to the
side
to deal with the applications, there will still be a delay while the
names
are hand-written on the list.  Our society is becoming so fast-paced -
everyone is in a hurry.  I worry that if we no longer have to meet a
registration deadline, and we no longer have to take an oath, this
diminishes the importance of the election, and some people may walk away
rather than stand in line.  Yes, the oath may be self-administered but
very
few people will read it or take it seriously.  They don't read the
certification that they sign on the present application.  I had one
voter
sign and swear that he was a resident, only to find out after he voted
that
he moved away years ago.  This may be a felony but that only matters if
someone is willing to prosecute, and apparently no one is.

I feel very strongly about the purity of the elections and take pride in
the fact that we do it right and we do it well, and for the most part
everyone' s vote counts.  But at some point the voter has to take some
responsibility for the privilege of voting.  I believe in doing
everything
that we can to increase voter turnout but I feel the solution is more
education, and I know that you are making progress in that area.  As
clerks
we should all be talking to our schools, to get the younger people
interested in democracy.  I think the problem of low turnout is a result
of
apathy rather than the difficulty of voter registration.  I think people
who truly want to vote will do what they need to in order to register,
and
it isn't the application process that is keeping people away.  I would
hate
to see us create a more hectic election day and cause more people to be
disillusioned with the system that we have, only to find out that it
creates more problems than it solves.

Perhaps same-day registration won't seem as daunting when all of our
polling places are on-line, but that isn't going to be the case in the
near
future.

I can understand the idea that same-day registration may help to
alleviate
the problems associated with moter-voter, but if the state-wide voter
checklist is accessible to the public, will voters be able to go online
before election day to check that they are registered?  This would have
prevented most of the problems that we had, because most of the people
who
registered with DMV were skeptical about it and came to the polls
wondering
if they were on the checklist.  Most of them seemed concerned enough
that
they would have checked ahead of time if they had known how, and we
simply
gave them an affidavit and they voted.

If other town clerks are finding that people try to register and just
miss
the deadline, maybe we could move the deadline to be closer to the
election.  Dare I suggest the day before, to coincide with the deadline
for
absentee ballots?  This would still give us time to finalize our
checklists
before the polls open (although it would make for a crazy morning or a
late
evening).  While I'm on the subject of deadlines, I noticed that you are
proposing to change the registration deadline to 5:00.  I agree that
noon
doesn't make sense, but could the deadline be the "regular close of
business" for consistency's sake?

Regarding changing the date of the primary, if it has to be changed, I
would prefer the end of August over the beginning of June, for a couple
of
reasons.  I think more people take vacations earlier in the summer
rather
than later, meaning more election workers would be available in
August.  And people often request absentee ballots for both the primary
and
general elections at the same time, and that would mean someone might be
requesting a ballot in May for an election in November.  That leaves 6
months when the person could move and forget to give us their new
address.  This happens so frequently with tax bills that I'm sure it
would
also happen with ballots, and mail doesn't always get forwarded.

On the subject of absentee ballots, hooray for the suggestion to let us
check them off the day before.  As you know we have a high percentage of
voters using the absentee process, and I spent many hours on election
day
standing in the check-in line, trying to read a few names at a time in
between voters without making anyone wait.  I am in favor of anything
that
would streamline the process on election day and help the voters to get
through quickly.

II would also like to see the minutes from the clerk's advisory
committee,
to help me see the other side of the issues.  I appreciate the
opportunity
that you are giving us to voice our concerns.

Respectfully,

Bobbi Brimblecombe










At 04:04 PM 1/26/2005 -0500, you wrote:
>Deb,
>
>   I have downloaded the memorandum mentioned in the email you sent
> regarding changes to the Election law.  Here are my initial concerns:
>
>Item 1: Change the date of the Primary Election to second Tuesday of
June
>or last Tuesday of August.   Barre Town is on a fiscal year.  By having
>the primary in June (the end of a fiscal year)  this would allow for a
>more level funding of elections from year to year.    Example:  Primary
>would be in one fiscal year and General Election in another fiscal
year.
>Major costs for municipalities due to programming of machines, etc.
>
>Item #2:  Same day voter registration.  I agree it may help eliminate
the
>motor-voter issue, but I disagree that it makes it easier for Town
Clerks.
>
>     In Barre Town our checklist for the past General Election was
> 5496.  I had two officials whose duty is was to assist those
individuals
> who were not on our checklist.  Of the 87 people we assisted, 36 were
> added to the checklist, 2 were turned away, and the remainder sent to
> other municipalities where they were registered to vote (determined by
> using cell phones to call other municipal clerks).
>
>    In my 15 years working at Barre Town I have found residents to be
> "procrastinators" when it comes to voting.  Changing to same day voter
> registration only encourages individuals to put off the task until
voting
> day.  This then becomes a nightmare.  Currently Barre Town has a paper
> check-in list at the polling place.  Whenever a name is added to the
> checklist during polling hours it is written on the paper check-in
list
> (which must be retained for 5 years).  There were 266 names added to
the
> checklist for the General Election. (Remember the checklist had been
> updated for the September 2004 Primary.)   I can't help but wonder if
> same day voter registration were allowed how many of those 266 would
have
> waited until election day to register!  Try reconciling a cluttered
> check-in list voter count  to the paper count from the voting
> machines.  I can't see where this is easier for a clerk
>
>  With the new statewide checklist comes the use of technology.  In
trying
> to come to terms with the most efficient way to handle same day voter
> registration I find it NECESSARY to have internet access at the
polling
> place to be connected to the statewide checklist.  Being connected
would
> allow the following:  immediate change a residency; almost eliminate
the
> possibility of trying to register to vote in more than one town; and
> reduce the number of staff hours required to enter the additions the
> following day (duplication of work - very inefficient).
>
>   While internet access would solve the problem, it creates another
for
> me and most clerks.  My polling place is not located at the municipal
> building but at the local elementary school gymnasium and currently
does
> not have internet access.   Infrastructure improvements are scheduled
to
> be completed sometime in 2006-2007.
>
>   Changes to Section 2144a - Registration (4):  I am not happy with
the
> proof of identification.  One of those items may not enough.  First of
> all you mention that many Vermont residents have mailing addresses
that
> are different from the E-911 address.  Barre Town is no exception and
has
> 5 different zip codes.  Therefore, identification should be more than
> just a photo ID.  I would assume most individuals would use a VT
drivers
> license.  I have a staff member whose mailing address is Websterville
> (within Barre Town) but physically resides in Orange.  Since a drivers
> license does not necessarily provide a physical location another form
of
> evidence should be presented.
>
>    Utility bills should not be acceptable UNLESS they include the
> physical location of the property and clearly show the owners
> name.  Washington County Electric Bills do not give a physical
location
> of the property. Green Mountain Power bills do give a physical
> location.  However, if you return the payment stub, then the owner
> information is missing and you don't know who owns the property. This
> means someone could bring a current utility bill (minus the payment
stub)
> and I could not confirm the bill belonged to the person presenting it.
>
>   The ID section should note that at lease one piece of identifying
> documentation must contain the E-911 property location.
>
>3. Make the voters oath self-administered - While it would make my life
>easier and I don't oppose the change, I would hate to see the
>administering of oath go by the wayside.  Registering to vote should be
>held in highest regard and not treated as some daily ritual like doing
>dishes. By eliminating this step I feel as though we are showing
>disrespect to those who have given their lives so that citizens can be
>given this privilege.  Is this the message we want to send?
>
>   I have worked with many young voters and  find it hard to  believe
that
> the administering of an oath is a big reason "young people" are not
> registering. In my discussions with young people, including my two
> children, I have found ignorance to be the problem.
>
>Deb,  other items not mentioned include:  1)  any changes to the
checklist
>posting requirement should the same day voter registration be adopted,
2)
>how the BCA checklist update meetings fit into the new same day voter
>registration scheme?,  3) Does same day voter registration also allow
us
>to remove individuals - some type of reconciliation for the checklist?,
4)
>How does this change effect my municipal budget - will I have to add
staff
>to accommodate - will it take longer for me to do my reporting, etc.
>
>    Deb, you mentioned in your original email that a committee had been
> meeting to discuss these issues.  Are there committee minutes
somewhere
> that I could read.
>
>Summation:
>
>     Ultimately, as Town Clerk, I am accountable for the conduct of
> elections.   I know that same day voter registration is
> inevitable.  However, there are just to many unanswered questions at
this
> time for me to support this issue.
>
>   If you would like to talk more, or if I can be of additional service
> feel free to let me know.
>
>Respectfully,
>
>Donna Kelty
>Barre Town Clerk-Treasurer
>802-479-9391 (Fax) 802-479-9332
>email:  [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
>    Original memo from Deb Markowitz:
>
> >>> [log in to unmask] 01/26/05 11:49AM >>>
>I would love to talk to clerks who have concerns about same day
>voter registration - or any other of the office's legislative
>proposal (which you will be able to  view on our Elections
>website later today.)
>
>The office's legislative proposals were developed with input
>from many clerks around the state (the office has a clerk's
>advisory committee which includes clerks from large and small
>communites all around the state).  The growing feeling is that
>same day registration will let us address election day problems
>with motor voter law.  The feeling is that same day registration
>will allow clerks to skip the time consuming and upsetting
>problems that occur when voters come to the polls and find that
>their name is not on the checklist.
>
>Because we will have in place a statewide voter checklist there
>will no longer  be a real risk of voter fraud because a person who
>registers and votes in two places will be caught -- and it is a
>felony offense!  (Remember - right now a person could be
>voting in more than one place and we would never know it!)
>
>What is contemplated is that a person who wishes to register and
>vote on the same day would be required to show ID - and then
>would be added to the checklist at the polls.  After the election
>the clerk would give  the Secretary of State's Office the names of
>voters who registered and voted on the same day and we would
>cross-check the name on the statewide checklist.
>
>With the statewide checklist coming on line next year - this is
>great timing.  What I like about same day registration is that it
>will help clerks solve election day problems.  I also think it
>would be a great addition to our law because the states that have
>it  have the highest voter turnouts in the nation!
>
>I would love to hear your thoughts and concerns about this
>proposal or any of the others!
>
>Deb
>
>
>
>
>
>Deborah L. Markowitz
>Secretary of State
>Vermont Secretary of State's Office
>26 Terrace Street
>Montpelier, Vermont 05609
>(802)828-2363

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LIST.UVM.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager