FLORIDA: Election audits not needed, judge tells Sarasota County

[Bill Bored]

For those who think paper ballots = election integrity:



Election audits not needed, judge tells Sarasota County

SARASOTA COUNTY: New state law overrides local charter, he rules

By Todd Ruger

Published: Saturday, July 31, 2010 at 1:00 a.m.

Sarasota elections officials have called off plans to run an audit on the results of next month's primary elections following a court decision that determined the audit was not required.

-snip-

The president of Sarasota Alliance for Fair Elections, which has fought for four years to uphold the county charter, urged county officials to appeal the latest decision.

"They should stand up for our charter, they should stand up for the will of the voters," SAFE president Kindra Muntz said.

Circuit Judge Charles Roberts on Wednesday ruled that a state election law enacted this year sets out an audit procedure and does not permit additional audits.

The decision throws a lawsuit out of court just a few months after the Florida Supreme Court gave it new life.

In February, the Florida Supreme Court ruled that the charter amendment requiring an audit of 5 percent of all ballots did not conflict with state law.

But the legislature enacted the new law in May.

-snip-

Read more at:
http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100731/ARTICLE/7311037/2416/NEWS&Title=Election-audits-not-needed-judge-tells-Sarasota-County&template=printpicart

[RC]

1. We are losing our country a baby step at a time.

The frog in pot on the stove is an apt analogy. And still most of us sleep peacefully.

[lpbk2713]

2. Katherine Harris ... gone but not forgotten.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

3. The sick legacy of Kathy Dent

paper ballots + post election precertification audits and recounts

Florida is just plain anti transparency.

The audits should be by volunteers or the public and not an audit firm.
Dent managed to come up with an impossibly high figure to hire an accounting
firm to conduct the audit, and used that as an argument against audits.

[OnTheOtherHand]

4. well, the amendment required an independent auditor

The audits shall be conducted on Election Day or within 24 hours after the closing of the polls, in clear public view, by a reputable, independent and nonpartisan auditing firm.

http://www.leagle.com/unsecure/page.htm?shortname=inflco20100211147

I don't know enough about the audit to know whether the bids were jacked up, but at first glance "under $200,000" does look a lot higher than when audits are conducted by election staff -- never mind volunteers.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

5. Our audits in NC cost very little, but we have regular folks do them. you have seen the report

Although our audits are not perfect, they take just a few hours (per county) after an election.
The cost is little, and some counties jack up the cost (because they hate audits) and some
make the cost very little (because they accept the mandate).


Regular folks, volunteers are recruited to perform the audits which are done in public by two separate teams who each recount a randomly selected precinct or in some cases an early voting site.

Wake Co audited an entire early voting site in 2008.

[OnTheOtherHand]

6. yeah, it really doesn't have to be too hard!

Some election officials seem scared to death of hand counts because they think that it's insanely hard to get the same result twice. But with a good approach, it isn't so hard -- and one-off errors shouldn't be a show-stopper anyway.