November 2, 2007

Voting group plans to appeal ruling Appeals court struck down extra audits; state Supreme Court is next
By JEREMY WALLACE

jeremy.wallace@heraldtribune.com 


SARASOTA -- A day after an appeals court struck down election reforms in Sarasota County as unconstitutional, a community group says it will take the case to the Florida Supreme Court.

Kindra Muntz , leader of the Sarasota Alliance for Fair Elections, said the reforms included tougher auditing procedures for voting equipment that are critical to fair elections.

"It's too important," she said. "We decided we will go to the Supreme Court."

On Wednesday, the 2nd District Court of Appeal ruled that Sarasota County cannot have a more aggressive auditing procedure than the rest of the state.

In a charter amendment that Muntz' group helped pass in 2006, the county would have been required to audit 5 percent of the precincts after each election. The state law requires just 1 percent.

Muntz said Sarasota County voters should have the right to place tougher standards on their elections to assure accurate results.

In its decision against SAFE, the appeals court judge recommended that the Florida Supreme Court review the case because it is a "matter of great public importance."

Muntz said that language helped make the decision to petition the Supreme Court.

The charter amendment passed last November with 55 percent of the vote.

The amendment required the county to change to a paper-ballot voting system and spelled out the tougher auditing standards.

The court's decision will not affect the county's voting machines, because earlier this year Gov. Charlie Crist signed into law a measure requiring all counties to go to a paper voting system.

The lawsuit seeking to strike down the amendment was filed by Secretary of State Kurt Browning, Sarasota Elections Supervisor Kathy Dent and the Sarasota County Commission.

Muntz said she expected the appeal to the Supreme Court to be filed this week.


Contact Jeremy Wallace at 361-4966 or jeremy.wallace@ heraldtribune.com.

To all concerned voters:  OCT 31, 2007
 
Late this afternoon SAFE learned that the 2nd District Court of Appeal in Florida ruled in a 32-page split decision against our Sarasota County Charter Amendment, saying that there is "implied preemption" of the conduct of elections by the Florida Secretary of State. 
 
If this decision holds, it will be a blow to home rule authority in all 19 home rule counties in Florida, will prevent counties from adding protections for voters when the Florida legislature fails to do so, and will relegate control of all voting procedures to the Secretary of State, a political appointee, to implement the Election Code.
 
Although Florida Governor Crist wisely recommended that all Florida counties use optical scanners and paper ballots for voting, the Florida legislature concurred, but did not include meaningful audits of election results in their omnibus bill passed in 2007. As counties and states across the country are learning, audits of machine tallies are key to verified elections and voter confidence.
 
Voters must continue to fight for fair and verified elections. They are the cornerstone of our democracy.
 
SAFE is considering its options to continue championing the rights of voters to achieve this goal.
 
We will keep you posted.
 
Kindra Muntz, President
Sarasota Alliance for Fair Elections (SAFE)
Co-Founder, Florida Voters Coalition
Member, VoteTrustUSA Leaders Group
safevote@comcast.net
www.safevote.org
941.497.1764

Florida Voters Coalition 
www.GoAllTheWayFlorida.com     
www.FCB.org

PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 16 May 2007

Contact:
Dan McCrea, Cell: 305-984-2900
Paul Edwards, Cell: 305-984-0909

Florida Voters Coalition AND Florida Council of the Blind
ANNOUNCE STRATEGIC ALLIANCE
All Voters Deserve Paper Ballots
Voters With Disabilities Must Not Be left behind

MIAMI: The Florida Voters Coalition (FVC) and the Florida Council of the Blind (FCB) today announced a strategic alliance calling on Florida state and county officials to provide paper ballots for all voters in all elections. “This is an historic day,” said FVC Co-Founder, Dan McCrea, “when those demanding the security of paper ballots and those demanding HAVA compliant accessibility for voters with disabilities speak with one unified voice. Listen up, state and county officials. No voter should be left behind, especially in the name of equality. That is simply absurd. It’s time to scrap your DREs and replace them with non-tabulating ballot marking devices, providing all voters paper ballots – no exceptions.”

“No exception needed or wanted for voters with disabilities,” said Paul Edwards , former President of the American Council of the Blind, speaking for the Florida Council of the Blind, the state-wide chapter. “The very purpose of HAVA Section 301 was to provide an equal opportunity to voters with disabilities. ’Equal’ doesn’t only apply to the ability to cast a private and independent ballot – something precious to blind and other disabled voters - it also applies to the ability to cast a secure ballot. Only optical scan paper ballot systems are secure in Florida today. Florida ’s newly passed legislation requires paper ballots for everyone then provides an exception for voters with disabilities. Until 2012, counties can choose to provide us paperless electronic DREs. Our message today is, NO THANK YOU. We don’t want them and should not be forced to use them. Paperless electronic DRE voting systems are fit for no one.”

“For years,” McCrea said, “proponents of paperless electronic DRE voting systems have claimed that their systems are the only solution for voters with disabilities. That’s just not true. Non-tabulating ballot marking devices provide superior touchscreen, audio, tactile, sip-and-puff, and other interface facilities to allow voters with disabilities to cast a private and independent vote, and they are HAVA compliant. But unlike failed DRE systems, they allow all voters to vote on one uniform, paper-ballot-based, secure voting system. Surely that is the intent of both federal and state law.”

McCrea cited the federal Election Assistance Commission’s (EAC) July 20, 2005 –EAC Advisory 2005-004: How to determine if a voting system is compliant with Section 301(a) a gap analysis between 2002 Voting System Standards and the requirements of Section 301(a)[1], which states on Page 4, subparagraph (7), “Section 301(a)(3)(B) contemplates that an accessible voting system can include a direct recording electronic (DRE) voting system or other voting system equipped for individuals with disabilities. This advisory should not be read to preclude the innovation and use of accessible voting systems other than DREs for the purposes of meeting this requirement.”

“Please note,” said McCrea, “that this EAC advisory is focused on accessibility – not security. It is two years old and during that time, we’ve seen the last shreds of voter confidence in the security of DRE systems completely collapse. Sarasota ’s 18,000 lost votes in the November 2006 federal Congressional District 13 race was just one well-publicized example.”

“Florida’s paperless electronic DRE voting systems lost over 100,000 votes just in the November 2006 election,” McCrea said. “No one should be relegated to vote on that junk.”

“Federal legislation pending in Congress is just another in the long string of reasons that counties should decide to scrap DRE’s in favor of a uniform, all paper ballot system,” said McCrea. “Under the lead bill, H.R. 811, counties could not retro-fit paper rolls to their existing DREs and will likely find the equipment unable to pass new testing provisions called for in the bill meaning counties will have to scrap it even before the 2012 deadline already set in Florida legislation. The good news is that the federal bill appropriates more than a billion dollars in new money to pay for the necessary changes,” McCrea added.

“We have our annual state-wide conference in Tallahassee this week,” said Edwards, “and we’re delighted that the Florida Voters Coalition will be joining us and participating. This is a model for the rest of the country and how cool is it that Florida is leading the way! Now it’s up to Florida ’s officials – especially at the county level – to Go All The Way and make sure voters with disabilities are not left behind.”

¹ http://www.eac.gov/docs/EAC%20Advisory%2005-004%20(%204%20page%20fit%20).pdf

April 30, 2007

It’s D-Day for the voting machine bill in Tallahassee! It is time for the Florida legislature to PASS and FUND a CLEAN election bill! Voters of ALL political parties are FED UP with the undervote problem on the DRE (Direct Recording Electronic) touchscreen machines. 18,412 votes were lost in Sarasota County--more in other counties in Florida. See the two short videos on www.safevote.org to see why people are upset. The “disappearing vote” video is also at www.goallthewayflorida.com and www.countallvotes.com. Use the one-click EZ auto-email forms to send a message to all members of the Florida legislature.

This is what the voters of Florida want:

Voter verified paper ballots (VVPB)--durable paper ballots, hand marked by the voter or by a certified non-tabulating ballot-marking device. The voter verified paper ballot should be the official ballot, when discrepancies between machine counts and hand audits are found.

• Mandatory, random, statistically significant manual (hand to eye) audits of voter verified paper ballots compared to electronic vote tallies.
   
• These audits should be completed PRIOR to certification of elections, not
   
• after elections are certified. The whole point of these “bottom-line” audits is to make sure the machine totals are correct!
   
• If the time for certification of elections is too short, INCREASE IT. Other states allow 25-31 days to certify elections; Florida only allows 11 days after a General Election, 7 days after a Primary. That is way too short.
   
• Make sure any recount required is of ALL the votes in a race, not just the undervotes (those left blank) and overvotes (those with too many candidates chosen.) Overvotes and undervotes are just a sliver of the votes determining the results of an election.
   
• Floridians of all political parties are fed up with the undervote problem on DRE (Direct Recording Electronic) touchscreen voting machines. It’s time for a change. Give us optical scanners and paper ballots, like those used in 52 out of 67 counties in Florida. Give feedback as required by law for language minorities. Give us ballot-marking devices for the disabled that allow ALL voters to vote on paper ballots. Give us elections that are audited and verified. Floridians don’t want to be the laughing stock of the nation again and again because of failed voting systems. Sir Winston Churchill said “The period of procrastination is over.” It is time for the Florida legislature to act on behalf of all Florida voters, to restore voter confidence in Florida’s elections.

Kindra Muntz, President

Sarasota Alliance for Fair Elections (SAFE)
safevote@comcast.net
www.safevote.org
941.497.1764Member, Florida Voters Coalition
Member Leaders Group

Court Recognizes Pennsylvania Voters' Right
to Reliable, Secure Voting Machines

'Great Victory'
in Challenge to Use of Direct Electronic Voting Systems
in 56 Counties Statewide

PHILADELPHIA, April 12 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/

A Pennsylvania court held late today that voters have a right, under the commonweath's constitution, to reliable and secure voting systems and can challenge the use of electronic voting machines "that provide no way for Electors to know whether their votes will be recognized" through voter verification or independent audit.

The ruling by the Commonweath Court allows the continuation of a suit filed last year by 26 individual Pennsylvania voters against the Secretary of State, that challenged the certification of Direct Electronic Voting systems (DREs) used in 56 counties across the state.

"This is a great victory for Pennsylvania voters," said Mary Kohart, a partner at Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, one of the lawyers representing the group of voters. The case, which ultimately seeks the de-certification of the DREs, was also brought by the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia (PILCOP) and Chester County attorney Marian K. Schneider.

The 4/3 decision was sharply critical of the Pennsylvania Secretary of State's actions in certifying the DREs. Judge Rochelle Friedman, who authored the majority opinion, noted the certification was the result of "deficient examination criteria" which "do not approximate those that are customary in the information technology industry for systems that require a high level of security."

"Because Electors have no way of knowing whether their votes will be honestly counted by DREs, that are not reliable or secure, and that provide no means for vote verification or vote audit," the voters sufficiently raised a violation of the Pennsylvania constitution in their suit, the court declared.

"Across the country, both state legislatures and Congress are realizing that DRE voting systems cannot be trusted," said Michael Churchill, a lawyer with PILCOP. "More and more states are requiring optical-scan-paper-ballots that voters mark directly or through a ballot-marking device." Procedurally, the court's decision overruled the Secretary of State's 16 preliminary objections against the voter's August 2006 complaint. The objections claimed that the voters had no legal right to proceed with their case and no legal right to obtain the relief that they sought.

In the voters' complaint, they alleged that the DREs failed during elections in Pennsylvania and in other states by:

• · losing votes
• · registering votes for one candidate when the voter was attempting to vote for another candidate
• · causing high "under-vote" rates
• · failing to register votes when the ballot contained only one question
• · counting votes twice
• · failing to print "zero tapes" to demonstrate that no lawful votes were stored on the machine prior to the election
• · printing "zero tapes" after votes had been cases reporting phantom votes and other irregularities.

Schneider noted that last fall's elections across the country showed the unreliability of the machines. "The 2006 elections demonstrated that DREs repeatedly failed by breaking down, switching votes, losing votes and not providing the security necessary for a functional democracy," she said. Holly Jacobson, co-director at Voter Action, noted that good alternatives exist to the unreliable electronic voting machines: "Paper balloting, with ballot marking devices for the disabled, is a more secure and accountable option, which is why states like Michigan and New Mexico and others, in addition to hundreds of counties around the country, switched in time for last November's elections."

Kohart noted that in light of today's court ruling so clearly establishing the law, "We hope that the Secretary will think about a quick settlement of this case."

Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, a full-service national law firm established in 1849, recently announced its combination with the more than 170 lawyers at Chicago-based Gardner Carton & Douglas. The merger, effective in January 2007, created a firm of more than 630 lawyers in 12 offices nationwide. For more information, please visit http://www.drinkerbiddle.com.

SOURCE Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Toward a better ballot
HeraldTribune Article Feb 3, 2007

Crist's initiative should help restore voters' faith

Gov. Charlie Crist's call for primarily paper-based voting throughout Florida is good news.

We support Crist's aim and hope the Legislature will provide the requested funding, which would greatly help counties such as Sarasota switch from predominantly touch-screen voting to optical-scan systems.

The governor's initiative, announced Thursday, is a necessary attempt to rectify the damage caused by deepening distrust of paperless machines. Experience -- particularly the recent undervote mystery that emerged in Sarasota County's District 13 congressional race -- has left citizens wary of elections where ballots are collected on computer chips that leave no independently verifiable trail of voter intent.

As the community has learned through more than three months of auditing after the disputed District 13 outcome, it is hard to prove definitively that a touch-screen is working properly -- and just as hard to prove that it is not. The election is being contested in court, with a report on the state-led audit due Feb. 9.

The optical scanners sought by Crist -- and approved by Sarasota County voters in November -- probably won't cure all election woes. But they likely would prevent an undervote mystery because the paper ballots are marked directly by voters, without intervening software that may garble voter intent. The ballot itself stands as evidence for reviewing and recounts, if necessary.

Touch-screens cannot deliver that, though they could be retrofitted with equipment that provides a paper trail -- not a ballot -- that citizens can check before casting their vote. Paper-trail equipment has not been certified in Florida, but it will have to be in order to meet Crist's goal. Under the governor's proposal, he would allow use of retrofitted touch-screens for early voting sites and for disabled voters.

Both of those exceptions give us qualms. As long as touch-screen systems are in use, the state would remain exposed to the doubts and difficulties they present. A paper trail would offer some reassurance, but the machine-generated scroll is not an equal substitute for a ballot marked directly by the voter.

Admittedly, touch-screens are easier for some people with disabilities to use. But state elections officials say certification is imminent for the Automark, a disability-friendly device for use with optical scanners. That development would shrink the rationale for continued use of touch-screens.

Experience suggests that Florida's paper-here, touch-screen-there approach lacks necessary uniformity. Crist's initiative, if successful, would ensure that the vast majority of Floridians vote on one system: optically scanned paper ballots. That's a welcome step in the right direction.

Last modified: February 03. 2007 12:00AM
http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070203/OPINION/702030597/1030\

Deja Vu in Florida
The New York Times | Editorial
  Sunday 26 November 2006

  One of the great hazards of the way electronic voting has been introduced in the United States is that it could end up undermining democracy by producing unreliable election results that cannot be truly audited or corrected. This month, that nightmare became a reality. Voting machines in a Congressional race in Florida - where else...? - may have swallowed about 18,000 votes, far more than the nominal winner's razor-thin margin of victory. Because those votes were in the loser's strongest county, if there was a computer glitch it probably changed the outcome of the race.

  Vern Buchanan, the Republican candidate in Florida's 13th Congressional District, was certified the winner, with 369 more votes than the Democrat, Christine Jennings. But voting machines in Sarasota County produced about 18,000 "undervotes," ballots on which the voter made other choices, but did not vote in the Congressional race. There have been reports of voters saying that their votes did not register when they chose Ms. Jennings, or that the race did not appear on their machines.

  If the machines are to be believed - a big if - an extraordinary 14.9 percent of Sarasota County voters using the machines decided to skip the Congressional race, a highly publicized contest that voters knew could help decide which party controlled the House of Representatives. Among the absentee ballots, which were cast on paper, the undervotes were a more plausible 2.5 percent. The undervote rates in the district's other counties were far less than in Sarasota County.

  There is a good chance that if something went wrong it changed the result. Sarasota was Ms. Jennings's strongest county, and The Orlando Sentinel's analysis of the ballots that did not register a choice in the Congressional race found that the votes cast in other races were more Democratic than Republican - and by a margin of more than the 369 votes separating Mr. Buchanan and Ms. Jennings.

  The Jennings campaign has filed a lawsuit challenging the results. There are, unfortunately, no voter-verified paper ballots, so all that can be done is to try to figure out what went on inside the "black boxes," as critics call electronic voting machines that do not produce a paper record for each vote.

  The campaign wants its experts to review the machines' secret computer source code, the programming that runs the computer inside the machine, to look for problems. Election Systems and Software, the company that made the machines, is not saying whether it will allow this. If it resists, the courts should order the company to hand over the code - a requirement that should, in fact, be routine in all places where electronic voting machines are used.

  As Ms. Jennings's suit proceeds, we should learn more about what, if anything, went wrong, and what the options are if any remedies are needed. But one verdict is already in: electronic voting without the full array of protections, including a voter-verified paper trail, is unacceptable.
 

Sarasota Alliance for Fair Elections (SAFE)
Sarasota County, Florida
For immediate release              
contact: safevote@comcast.net
September 15, 2006                
 

Grass roots referendum could lead the way to open voting in Florida
Costly legal battle results in win for citizen group

 

Attorney Thomas Shults, representing the nonpartisan citizens group, Sarasota Alliance for Fair Elections (SAFE), stood up against attorneys for the county and state government, and won. A trio of attorneys for the County Commissioners, the Supervisor of Elections, and the Secretary of State fought a citizen petition requiring voter verified paper ballots and independent random audits of election results in Sarasota County, to keep it off the ballot in November. On Wednesday, September 13th, Chief Judge Robert B. Bennett, of the Twelfth Judicial Circuit, State of Florida issued a final judgment saying the referendum was constitutional and the Commissioners “shall submit the proposed amendment to the electorate.”

When the citizens of Sarasota County approve this referendum, Supervisor of Elections Kathy Dent says “the public will have to pay for new equipment”. Cost studies done by SAFE shows new optical scanners could be paid for in less than two years with the savings in operating costs for touch screen machines. Kindra Muntz, President of SAFE, says “the county will save hundreds of thousands of dollars in coming years with optical scanners”.

Since 2002, Sarasota County and 14 other counties in Florida have voted exclusively on “paperless” touch screen Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting machines that have no independent record of the vote. Failures and errors of these machines in Florida and around the country have raised citizen concerns about the lack of verifiability of election results. In January, 2006, Sarasota County voters launched a citizens’ petition initiative to amend the County Charter to require paper ballots. Over 14,500 voters from all precincts, political parties, and age groups responded.

The complete ruling of Chief Justice Bennett can be seen on the website of the Sarasota Alliance for Fair Elections (SAFE), www.safevote.org. The grassroots group has to raise $28,000 for their legal defense. No estimate has yet been given on how much the public is paying for the attorneys who opposed them. 

If the citizens of Sarasota County approve this referendum, they will have verified elections by 2008, and could lead the way to verified voting throughout Florida.

Sarasota Alliance for Fair Elections (SAFE)
Sarasota County, Florida
For immediate release

September 13, 2006                                      
 

Sarasota court orders election on charter amendment requiring paper ballots
Judge rules that County commissioners must submit citizen petition to a vote

Chief Judge Robert B. Bennett, of the Twelfth Judicial Circuit, State of Florida issued a final judgment on the petition for writ of mandamus by the Sarasota Alliance for Fair Elections that "the Board of County Commissioners of Sarasota County shall submit the proposed amendment to the Sarasota County Charter to the Sarasota County electorate in accordance with the requirements on provisions of Article VII of the Sarasota County Charter." The amendment requires voter verified paper ballots and independent random audits of election results in Sarasota County.

This ruling in favor of the Sarasota Alliance for Fair Elections validates the process of proposing amendments to the charter via citizen petition. Over 14,500 voters in Sarasota County from all precincts, all demographic groups, and all political parties signed a petition for paper ballots and mandatory audits as opposed to the paperless touchscreen voting system now used in Sarasota County and 14 of the other most populous counties in Florida. This was well over the 12,030 or 5% of the registered voters needed to put the referendum on the Sarasota County ballot in November.

Rather than voting to authorize the election at their August 22nd meeting, the County Commissioners, at the advice of the County Attorney, filed a lawsuit for a declaratory judgment on the language of the petition, challenging its constitutionality.

Judge Bennett's decision validates the right of citizens to vote on the measure, and affirms the legality of much of the petition, which is the criterion for placement on the ballot.  The Board of County Commissioners must respond to the judge's ruling in their meeting on September 13th. The resolution setting the election along with the ballot language must be delivered to the Supervisor of Elections by Friday, September 15th in order to print the referendum on the November 7th ballot.

The complete ruling of Chief Justice Bennett can be seen on the website of the Sarasota Alliance for Fair Elections (SAFE), at www.safevote.org.

Sarasota Alliance for Fair Elections (SAFE)
Sarasota County, Florida
safevote@comcast.net

September 7, 2006

Decision Pending in Voting Trial
State of Florida joined Sarasota County in suit against citizen petition

Two consolidated lawsuits were tried Wednesday by Chief Justice Robert Bennett of the 12th Judicial Circuit in Sarasota County, Florida. Both addressed a charter amendment proposed by citizen petition initiative to require voter verified paper ballots and mandatory random independent audits of election results. Petitions submitted by over 14, 500 people from all precincts, demographic groups and political parties in Sarasota County, totaled well over the 12,030 (5% of the registered voters) required to put the referendum on the ballot in November. Per the County Charter, the measure should be placed before the voters, without engaging in pre-election legal review.

Florida Secretary of State Sue Cobb joined the County lawsuit which claimed that the language of the petition is unconstitutional. Thomas Shults, attorney for the Sarasota Alliance for Fair Elections (SAFE) claimed that the language of the petition is constitutional, and meets both Florida and federal law, and the Board of County Commissioners has a duty under the county’s home rule charter government to put the measure before the voters in November. His brief can be viewed on the SAFE website, www.safevote.org under “Breaking News.”

The underlying issue is whether Sarasota voters will have a choice on verified elections or not. The current “paperless” touchscreen Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting machines used in Sarasota County and 14 other of the most populous counties in Florida, do not provide an independent record of the vote to verify machine tallies. Reported problems in other counties using the same equipment as that in Sarasota--Election Systems and Software (ES&S) iVotronics--have resulted in missing or corrupted vote data in recent elections. Concerned voters of Sarasota County want a system that is verifiable and auditable, such as the optical scan/paper ballot system used by 52 out of 67 Florida counties.

Kathy Dent, Supervisor of Elections of Sarasota County, testified as a witness for the County.  Ion Sancho, Supervisor of Elections of Leon County, testified for SAFE as an expert witness in Florida Election Law.
 

Sarasota Alliance for Fair Elections (SAFE)
Sarasota County, Florida
For immediate release
Contact: safevote@comcast.net
September 3, 2006

Florida Secretary of State joins County in Suit against Citizens
Lawsuit questioning petition language could keep referendum off November ballot

Over 14,500 people from all political parties in Sarasota County, Florida submitted petitions to require voter verified paper ballots and mandatory random independent audits of election results. The number was well over the 12,030 required to put the issue on the ballot in November to amend the County Charter. 

On September 1st, Florida Secretary of State Sue Cobb joined a lawsuit by the Board of County Commissioners to question the petition language prior to putting the measure on the ballot. The added support from the state could bolster an effort to kill the referendum before voters have a chance to vote on whether they want verified and audited elections or not. 

Citizens are now fighting for their right to petition their government and be heard. Thomas Shults, attorney for the nonpartisan citizens’ group Sarasota Alliance for Fair Elections (SAFE), filed a simultaneous suit to force the Commissioners to place the measure on the ballot as required by Sarasota County home rule charter government. Shults will represent SAFE in the trial of the two consolidated lawsuits in Circuit Court in Sarasota County Wednesday, September 6th.

The results of these lawsuits could affect decisions on voting equipment in Sarasota County and other counties in Florida, and will show whether government is listening to the voices of the citizens. For further information, see www.safevote.org.

Sarasota Alliance for Fair Elections (SAFE)                     
Sarasota County, Florida                              
For immediate release
Contact: SAFE  safevote@comcast.net
 

August 28, 2006

County and Supervisor of Elections Ordered to Show Cause
Circuit Court requires Sarasota County and SOE to justify refusal to place measure on ballot
 

Circuit Court Judge Deno Economou issued an Order to Show Cause on August 24th requiring Sarasota County and the Supervisor of Elections to justify legally why they should not be ordered to hold an election on the proposed charter amendments submitted by the Sarasota Alliance for Fair Elections (SAFE). The proposed amendments call for voter verified paper ballots and mandatory random independent audits of election results.

Issuance of the Order to Show Cause is a positive step for the nonpartisan grassroots Alliance, which gathered over 14,500 signature petitions in support of the amendment from voters in all precincts in Sarasota County, representing all political parties and all demographic groups. This was well over the 12,030 required to put a referendum on the ballot in November. Per the County’s home rule charter, “changes proposed by petition by 5% of the registered voters shall be submitted to the voters at a special election”.

Like many voters nationwide, Sarasota County voters are concerned that the “paperless” Direct Record Electronic (DRE) touchscreen voting machines they use, have no independent record by which to verify the accuracy of the machine count. “Vulnerabilities lie not only in precinct voting machines, but in central tabulators, as shown by errors reported in various Florida counties and around the country. All voting systems need an independent voter verified paper record that is used to check machine accuracy” said SAFE chairperson, Kindra Muntz. “Sarasota County should take a leadership role to provide that.”

If the citizens’ petition initiative is successful, Sarasota County could lead the state of Florida in a new era of open and verifiable voting. For further developments on this emerging story, see www.safevote.org.