Recount Procedures If Necessary In the Redlands City Council Election November 2016

People are asking about the recount procedure in the Redlands City Council Election.

California Elections Code section 15620 et seq. governs recounts requested by voters.  Any voter may file a request for a recount pursuant to Elections Code section 15620.  The request must be filed no later than five days after the completion of the official canvass.  The completion of the canvass occurs when the elections official signs the Certification of  Election Results.  Elections Code section 15620(c).

The request must be in writing, specify the contest to be recounted, and state on behalf of which candidate (in this case), slate of electors, or position on a measure it is filed.  Elections Code section 15620(a).  The request may specify the order in which precincts shall be recounted, it may specify the method of counting to be used, and any other relevant material to be examined.  Elections Code sections 15622, 15627, 15630. The choice of method is either a manual recount (as defined in section 15627), or  by means of the voting system used originally. Elections Code sections 15627(a).

When I observed the recount requested in the 2014 31st Congressional District, certain precincts (186 out of 477) thought to have anomalies were requested to be reviewed first in accordance with Elections Code section 15622.  When insufficient results were found, the recount was suspended.

If it is not a statewide measure, as this is not, the request needs to be filed with the county election official responsible for conducting the election, unless the City canvasses their own returns, which is not the case here.  Elections Code section 15620(a).

“Any time during the conduct of a recount and for 24 hours thereafter, any other voter may request the recount of any precincts in an election for the same office, slate of presidential electors, or measure not recounted as a result of the original request.”  Elections Code section 15623.

The election official will post a notice stating the date and place of the recount at least one day before the recount, and the candidates will be notified by overnight mail or personally.  Elections Code section 15628.

A recount is open to the public, and must start no later than seven days following the receipt of the request and shall be continued daily, except for Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays, for no less than six hours a day until completed.  Elections Code sections 15626, 15629.  A manual recount must be conducted under the supervision of the election official by recount boards, (each consisting of four San Bernardino County voters), appointed by the election official.  Elections Code section 15625.

While the recount is public (section 15629), No ballot can be touched “without the express consent of the elections official or the election officer supervising the special recount board.” Elections Code section 15630.

The regulations provide further details about observers and spokespeople:

“(a) Any person may observe the recount proceedings, subject to space limitations of the recount location selected by the elections official pursuant to section 20816.
(b) Upon request by the elections official, each interested party shall appoint one of his or her representatives to serve as a spokesperson authorized to make decisions with respect to the recount on behalf of the interested party, or the interested party may serve as his or her own spokesperson. When accompanied by an elections official or his or her designee, the spokesperson shall have access to all areas where ballots are recounted by hand or tabulated by machine.
(c) Questions other than ballot challenges shall be routed through the spokesperson, who shall then direct the question to the elections official or his or her designee. Official discussions with any interested party concerning resolution of questions shall include each interested party or his or her spokesperson.
(d) The elections official may require any requestor, interested party, representative, or observer of the recount proceedings to log in and receive an identification badge before entering the recount location. If required, identification badges shall be worn at all times and returned to the elections official at the end of the day.
(e) Requestors, interested parties, representatives, and observers shall not interfere in any way with the conduct of the recount, touch any voting system components, ballots, tally sheets or other special recount board materials, sit at the official recount worktables, place any material on the official recount worktables, talk to members of the special recount boards or supervisors while they are processing ballots or other recount materials or assist in recount procedures.
(f) The elections official may deny entry to the recount location to any person who fails to comply with the requirements of this section.” 2 CCR section 20820.

The procedure for challenging a ballot is that the person challenging the ballot states a reason, the person counting the ballot shall “count it as he or she believes proper and then set it aside with a notation as to how it was counted” and the “elections official shall, before the recount is completed, determine whether the challenge is to be allowed. The decision of the elections official is final.” Elections Code section 15631.

The Code of Regulations provides further detail:

“(a) A challenged ballot shall be set aside with a notation indicating the precinct number, the method by which it was originally counted for the official canvass, e.g., direct recording electronic voting system, scanner or hand count, the challenge number assigned to the ballot, the reason for the challenge, and the identity of the person making the challenge.
(1) A ballot that was counted in the official canvass, including a counted vote by mail or provisional ballot, may be challenged only on grounds of disqualifying distinguishing marks or some other grounds visible on the face of the ballot so that the ballot can be isolated and removed from the count if the elections official determines that the ballot was not properly cast.
(2) A voted ballot that was not counted in the official canvass, including a rejected unopened vote by mail or provisional ballot, may be challenged and added to the count if the elections official determines that the ballot was properly cast.
(b) Resolution of challenged ballots shall take place in a segregated area within the recount location, separate from that being used to perform the recount, as determined by the elections official, to avoid confusion and mixing of ballots.
(c) Challenges shall be resolved each day after all special recount boards complete their work, or more often if necessary, as determined by the elections official, but in any event before the conclusion of all recount proceedings. The determination of the elections official on a challenge shall be final. The elections official shall maintain a record of each challenge and the determination on each challenge.” 2 CCR section 20823.

Every vote in every precinct must be recounted, or the results are null and void, and if a different candidate wins, the results of the official canvass will be changed.  Elections Code section 15632.  A copy of the results shall be posted conspicuously in the office of the election official.  Elections Code section 15633.

Manual recounts have this procedure:

“(a) One of the four special recount board members shall read the ballot and call out the vote cast for the contest subject to recount on that ballot; one shall observe that the correct call was made, and two members shall each separately and independently record the votes as called out.
(b) Prior to beginning the actual manual recount, the elections official shall instruct all members of the special recount boards, requestor, interested parties, representatives and observers on the procedures to be followed for the recount and shall provide them with copies of these recount regulations, any local documentation concerning recount procedure, and documentation on how to interpret and read the votes cast on the ballot, consistent with federal and state law and the State Uniform Vote Count Standards. The instructions and documentation shall include a statement that in the event of a challenge, the determination of the elections official shall be final.
(c) Vote by mail and early-voted ballots cast from a precinct subject to recount shall be tabulated separately from ballots cast in a polling place on Election Day.” 2 CCR section 20831.
Since the Redlands Municipal Election was a “vote for multiple” election, if a manual recount is requested, the following procedure applies:
“Manual recount tabulation on a voting system in a “Vote for Multiple” contest is subject to the following requirements:

(a) Prior to counting the ballots for the contest subject to recount, and in the clear view of the requestor, spokespersons and observers, all ballots for the precinct shall be separated into stacks that do and do not contain the contest. Those that contain the contest shall be sorted as follows:
(1) Ballots that were not voted for the contest (under-voted);
(2) Ballots that were over-voted for the contest;
(3) Ballots indicating a vote for the first candidate listed on the ballot for the contest; and
(4) Ballots that do not indicate a vote for the first candidate listed on the ballot for the contest.
(b) Starting with the voted ballots, one member of the special recount board shall state the candidate or position for which the vote was cast making sure the requestor, interested parties and their representatives can observe the contest subject to recount.
(c) After the vote is stated and counted, the counted ballot shall be placed on the table, with the counted ballots placed in stacks of 10 (or 25).
(d) Two members of the special recount board shall record the votes stated, marking hashes in succession on their individual tally sheets. Each of these two board members shall announce when he or she has counted 10 (or 25) votes. If both members call out 10 (or 25) counted votes at the same time, the tally shall continue forward for the next 10 (or 25) ballots. If both recorders do not reach 10 (or 25) additional votes on the same ballot, then the count for the last interval of 10 (or 25) ballots shall be stricken from their tally sheets and those ballots recounted.
(e) A requestor or an authorized spokesperson may request to inspect any ballot. Tallying shall be halted while the ballot is presented to the requestor or spokesperson for closer inspection. At no time may any requestor or spokesperson touch or come into physical contact with any of the ballots. Tallying will resume once the inspection is completed, which the requestor or spokesperson shall complete in a reasonable amount of time.
(f) Once all the votes for the first candidate have been recorded, the valid voted ballots shall be resorted into two stacks:
(1) Ballots that were voted for the second candidate in the contest; and
(2) Ballots that do not indicate a vote for the second candidate in the contest.
The ballots voted for the second candidate shall be calculated in accordance with (b) through (e) above. Tallying shall continue in this manner, until the votes for each candidate in the contest have been recounted and tallied.
(g) After all voted ballots have been counted and tallied, the two special recount board members who have been recording the votes will each independently calculate the total votes for each candidate or position on their tally sheets. When both have completed totaling, they will each announce their totals one candidate or vote position at a time. If both announce the identical vote total for each candidate or position in the recounted contest, the recount of that precinct shall be deemed complete and the results reported to the elections official. If the special recount board members announce different vote totals for any candidate or vote position in the recounted contest, the recount tallies recorded and announced will be examined. If the difference can be explained by the special recount board or supervisor, or by the elections official or his or her designee, it shall be corrected on the tally sheet. A written explanation shall be made on an attachment to the tally sheet. In the event of an unexplained discrepancy, the results for that precinct shall be discarded and the recount of that precinct will start over.” 2 CCR section 20833.

There is a cost associated with a recount, and the amount for this Redlands Municipal Election recount, should it occur, will depend on a variety of factors.  The election official determines the amount of the deposit necessary to cover the costs of the recount for each day.  The voter filling the request must deposit, before the start of the recount and at the beginning of each day, the amounts to cover the cost of each day.  If the results are reversed, the deposit must be returned.  Elections Code section 15624.

How much will the recount be, if one is requested?  San Bernardino County does not give the typical fees, but the Lesli Gooch recount (which was a manual recount) was $6,300 for one day which changed one vote: http://www.latimes.com/local/political/la-me-pc-recount-halted-20140626-story.html

A City Council election in Victorville in 2014 with an 12 vote discrepancy would have cost $4,400 a day.

The estimated cost of a recount in the 8th Congressional District in 2012 was “$11,335 for the first day’s recount. [The requestor] will pay roughly $6,000 for each day after that.”

A 23 vote differential in a Hesperia Unified School District election had an estimated $8,000 per day recount cost. http://www.hesperiastar.com/article/20071119/NEWS/311199993

There is also an automatic manual recount (countywide) established by Election Code section 15360.  By law, a random sample of ballots from every election must be recounted manually to verify the computer count.  A minimum of one percent of all votes cast is included in the process.  This must occur before the election is certified.  The automatic manual recount is open to the public.  A court explained it like this:

“1 percent manual tally” is a procedure used in California to test whether there are any discrepancies between the electronic record generated by a voting machine and what is essentially a manual auditof that electronic record. Essentially, after each election, the “official conducting the election” is to conduct a “public manual tally of the ballots tabulated” by any voting machines “cast in 1 percent of the precincts chosen at random by the elections official.” (§ 15360.)  Nguyen v. Nguyen (2008) 158 Cal.App.4th 1636, 1643.

There are court challenges available after the recount, but since the recount in this case is mere speculation, they will be discussed at a later time.

The information you obtain at this blog is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is established by reading or commenting on this blog. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation.

 

A: 300 E. State St. Suite 517
      Redlands, CA 92373-5235
T: (909) 296-6708

The Galleon On The Back of Redlands City Hall

By Michael Reiter, Attorney at Law

Frank E. Moore, in Redlands, Our Town, mocks this galleon on the back of (old) City Hall because it has oars.   I decided to check it out in person today on my way to the library.

IMG_2138

Here’s the photo that I took. However, with a very small amount of Internet research, some galleons had oars.  See this book, for example.
A: 300 E. State St. #517, Redlands CA 92373-5235
T: (909) 296-6708

The Process in 2006 for the Redlands Council Vacancy That Resulted in The Appointment of Pete Aguilar

The City of Redlands is appointing a new Council Member on January 20, 2015.  I am one of the candidates.

In 2006, when Susan Peppler resigned, the Council had a similar appointment process.  I remember being in the audience as Assistant City Attorney, and that there were multiple ballots that resulted in Pete Aguilar being chosen to serve the remainder of Susan Peppler’s term.   Here are the minutes of the Redlands City Council meeting of April 18, 2006:

CITY COUNCIL VACANCY

A vacancy exists on the City Council due to the resignation of Councilmember Susan Peppler. At the meeting of April 4, 2006, the City Council voted to fill the vacancy through an appointment process on or before May 4, 2006. On April 5, 2006, the City issued a Notice of Intention to fill the vacancy on the City Council by appointment. Interested applicants were invited to submit applications to the Office of the City Clerk by 5:00 P.M. on April 14, 2006. Eleven (11) applications were received from: Peter R. Aguilar, George D. Bartch, Roy S. Cencirulo, Eric Robert Fraser, James G. (Jim) Macdonald, Dennis John Mullenix II, Reyes L. Quezada, Brian Roche, Mark Stanson, Eddie Tejeda and William E. (Bill) Turnpaugh. Voter registration has been confirmed for each applicant. Mayor Harrison explained the process to the applicants and audience.

At this time, he opened the meeting to public comments from the audience regarding the presentation and appointment process. Wayne Stair urged the City Council to consider appointing Pete Aguilar. Speaking in support of appointing Bill Turnpaugh were Brad Easter and Larry James.

A random drawing was conducted by City Clerk Poyzer, assisted by Assistant City Clerk Teresa Ballinger, to determine the order the applicants would speak. Five minutes presentations were made by: Peter R. Aguilar, Eddie Tejeda, Mark Stanson, Dennis John Mullenix II, Eric Robert Fraser, James G. (Jim) Macdonald, Roy S. Cencirulo, George D. Bartch, Brian Roche, William E. (Bill) Turnpaugh and Reyes L. Quezada.

Appointment – Nominations were opened by City Clerk Poyzer for an appointment to the City Council to complete a term ending on December 4, 2007. Councilmember Gilbreath nominated Pete Aguilar, Councilmember Gil nominated Reyes L. Quezada and Councilmember Gallagher nominated Bill Turnpaugh. The random roll call vote was as follows:

Aguilar: Councilmember Gilbreath

Quezada: Councilmember Gil
Turnpaugh: Councilmembers Gallagher and Harrison

There not being a majority vote for any one nominee, nominations were re- opened by City Clerk Poyzer for the appointment to the City Council to complete a term ending on December 4, 2007. Councilmember Gilbreath nominated Eric Fraser, Councilmember Gil nominated Reyes L. Quezada and Councilmember Harrison nominated Bill Turnpaugh. The random roll call vote was as follows:

Turnpaugh: Councilmembers Harrison and Gallagher

Fraser: Councilmember Gilbreath
Quezada: Councilmember Gil

There not being a majority vote for any one nominee, nominations were re- opened by City Clerk Poyzer for the appointment to the City Council to complete a term ending on December 4, 2007. Councilmember Gallagher nominated Pete Aguilar. Councilmember Gil nominated Reyes L. Quezada. The random roll call vote was as follows:

Aguilar: Councilmembers Gallagher, Gilbreath, Harrison and Gil Quezada: None

By unanimous vote, Pete Aguilar was appointed to the City Council to complete a term ending on December 4, 2007, and the Oath of Allegiance was administered to Mr. Aguilar by City Clerk Poyzer. Councilmember Aguilar expressed his appreciation for having been appointed to this position and pledged to do a good job of representing the citizens of Redlands.

The City Council meeting recessed at 7:17 P.M. and reconvened at 7:30 P.M.

PRESENT Jon Harrison, Mayor
Pat Gilbreath, Mayor Pro Tem

Gilberto Gil, Councilmember Mick Gallagher, Councilmember Pete Aguilar, Councilmember

I remember sitting behind Pete Aguilar.  I remember being surprised that there were two votes that were deadlocked, leading to a third vote.

We will see what happens this time.

Downtown Redlands and Walkability

By Michael Reiter, Attorney at Law

When I moved from West Redlands to Downtown Redlands, I found that it was much easier to walk to lunch.  The Walk Score is listed as

84 Very Walkable

Most errands can be accomplished on foot.

Today, on a particularly clear 68 degree day, I was able to walk from 300 E. State Street to the Citrus Village Shopping Center.  By contrast, my old address had a Walk Score of 48 (Car Dependent). Even though I would walk when the weather was nice, it had a lot of bad or non-existent sidewalk, a lack of marked pedestrian crossings, and since the start of the Alabama widening, a complete nightmare.

Putting aside debates about sustainability, I have a personal preference to walk around a downtown like Redlands’ downtown because I can patronize local businesses with ease. You cannot truly know a City until you have been able to walk it a ground level.

Also, when a business neighborhood, like downtown Redlands is walkable, it allows you to park once and visit a variety of stores, restaurants, or businesses without having to move your car.

A: 300 E. State St., Suite 517
     Redlands, CA 92373-5235
T: (909) 296-6708

Former Assistant City Attorney Michael Reiter Eyes Council Seat – Redlands Daily Facts

Today, the Redlands Daily Facts published an article on my application to be the next Redlands City Council Member.  The story is here.

 

Update: Why Were The States in the Streets Named After States in Redlands Chosen?

By Michael Reiter, Attorney at Law.

As an update to this post: I saw retired A.K. Smiley Public Library Director Larry Burgess at Eureka Burger last night, and I decided to ask him how the state-named streets in Redlands got their name.

Mr. Burgess was kind enough to tell me that they were named by the developer, and at least one of them was after his home state. He subdivided the land into roughly 25 acre parcels for orange groves, the remnants of which still exist in the area.  He said the information was not easy to find; he had run across it in years past.

A search of newspapers gives these references to the streets:

Iowa Street: San Bernardino Daily Sun, August 14, 1912, Pg. 9 (crop mortgage)

Alabama Street and California Street: San Bernardino Courier, April 25, 1894, Page 8 (Notice of Sheriff’s Sale on Execution).

New Jersey Street: San Bernardino Daily Sun, December 11, 1906, Page 6 (Resolution of the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Bernardino responding to a petition of property owners requesting a protection district consisting of the Redlands Storm Water Channel (what appears to be known now as the Mill Creek Zanja).

Kansas Street: San Bernardino Daily Sun, July 9, 1914, Pg. 3 (Boy arrested for sandbagging).

Tennessee Street: San Bernardino Daily Sun, January 31, 1897, Pg. 3 (Petition for Mission School District to the Board of Supervisors)

Nevada Street: San Bernardino Daily Sun, May 2, 1903, Pg. 2 (Petition to have Nevada accepted as a public road to the Board of Supervisors)

New York Street: Daily Sun, January 31, 1897, Pg. 1 (House building permit).

Texas Street: Daily Courier, September 26, 1888, Pg. 3 (Redlands Cannery to be constructed)

He agreed that some were added later to keep up the theme.

 

 

Copyright 2014 Michael Reiter, Attorney at Law

Friday Aside: Why Were The States in the Streets Named After States in Redlands Chosen?

By Michael Reiter, Attorney at Law.

I have yet to find an answer.  Some clues are found in the archives of the Fortnightly Club of Redlands, Streets in Redlands, by Dr. Lawrence E. Nelson, January 1974 at the Assembly Room of the A.K. Smiley Public Library.  The best take-away, completely non-related to the subject of this post,  from 1974:

Philip Merlan, the scholarly refugee professor at the University of Redlands and later at Scripps, once remarked that when he came to Redlands he was amazed to find how religious the people were; they even had a patron saint for torn-up streets. Everywhere he went he saw signs set up honoring St. Closed.

What states have streets named after them in Redlands?  Of the north-south streets, from west to east: California Street, New Jersey Street, a very tiny Oregon Street off of Orange Tree Lane, Nevada Street, Idaho Street connecting Plum Lane and Orange Tree Lane,  the solely-south-of-the-10 Iowa Street, Alabama Street, the rump Arizona Street off the anachronistic Coulston Street, Missouri Court (a cul-de-sac off of Park Avenue), Indiana Court, the cul-de-sac off of West Lugonia Avenue, Kansas Street (home of the Animal Shelter), which runs from Barton to Redlands Boulevard, Tennessee Street, the carved-up New York Street, Texas Street,  the somewhat north-south Michigan Avenue, Colorado Street north of Pioneer Avenue, the northside Ohio Street, the probably-not-named after the state Washington Street, and the probably-named-after-the-daughter-of-a-developer Georgia Street.  As far as east-west streets, Pennsylvania Avenue, Delaware Avenue, the way-out-east-may-technically-be-in-Yucaipa Florida Street.

I once answered an interrogatory speaking about Illinois Court (meaning Indiana Court), the location of a fatal motorcycle accident (outside the City limits), and the then-Public Works Director, Ron Mutter, informed me that there was no Illinois Court within the City, despite the fact that a variety of really old streets are named after Chicago streets (such as State Street) in Redlands.

The state-named streets are on the Lugonia grid, and that the original ones were California, New Jersey, Nevada, Iowa, Alabama, Tennessee, Kansas Street, New York Street, and Texas Street.  California is an easy one, but why Alabama and Tennessee?

Looking at a 1939 topographical map online, we see California Street, New Jersey Street, Nevada Street, Iowa Street, Alabama Street, Kansas Street, Tennessee Street, New York Street, and Texas Street, and Pennsylvania Avenue.  On the 1899 Redlands Quadrangle map, you can clearly see California and Alabama (the former because of its proximity to Bryn Mawr, the latter because it goes across the Santa Ana wash to Highland, but it doesn’t give street names.  The same on the 1901 Redlands Quadrangle topographical map, available on the USGS website for download, and the Redlands Quadrangle Map of 1908 shows the same.  So for now, the mystery of why certain states and not others is still a mystery.