School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Verbal confirmation of the expenses associated with April’s school board election recount has been provided to the Oshkosh Area School District and, according to an online story by the Oshkosh Northwestern, the costs are about triple what the district was anticipating or had budgeted for.
The recount was originally projected to cost between $6,000 and $8,000, but actual costs are said to be just over $19,000, mostly due to the expense associated with having legal counsel for the district present throughout the entire five-day recount.
I believe with such a close election the recount itself was justified, but I do not believe all the challenges or objections raised by Dan Becker were justified, or judicious on his part. Becker says the expense, though high, was worth it because it uncovered some "issues" within our current electoral system. What did it really uncover?
It uncovered no election or voter fraud nor any voter intimidation, but rather mistakes, pure and simple, which have and will continue to happen in every single election. While mistakes in the next election may well be different from the ones that happened in this one, mistakes will still occur. They cannot be avoided when you are dealing with human beings – especially ones who work long hours and are dealing with very tedious work.
The bottom line is I believe the costs were driven higher by persistent candidate objections despite the fact that it was very clear what the voter intent was in a large number of those cases. Unfortunately I think this recount uncovered more than just perceived “issues” with the system.
- Cheryl
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: chzhead on Saturday, May 06 2006 @ 06:20 AM MDT
By all means Cheryl, tell us how you feel. Nothing like reporting facts and not your personnal feelings towards the situation.The cost was to have a lawyer in the room ($14,000 of the $19,000).That is about 3/4 of the money going to a lawyer to sit in a chair and give poor advice. That was also by choice of the district, it was not required. So the cost would have been there regardless of the number of objections. Give us a break on your opinions please.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: admin on Saturday, May 06 2006 @ 08:43 AM MDT
Your post is unclear, much like some of your other ramblings. What I posted contained both fact and opinion - that is the point of blogs. Sorry you missed that lesson they day they taught it.
You say the district's attorney gave poor advice. That is your opinion. Unfortunately for you and your "side," that attorney's advice seems to have been largely supported by opinions from the State Elections Board. I suspect that's why the Board of Canvassers ruled as it did.
And the simple fact remains that if there had not been so many persistent objections this recount would not have taken as long as it did and the district would not have incurred the high bill it did (taxpayers are footing the bill, lest I remind you).
Finally, let me see if I have this right: You can offer your opinions, but not me because they're different from yours, huh? That's not the way things work. But here's a simple solution to you problem: If you don't like my opinions, don't read them. Nothing is forcing you to do so other than your obvious burning curiosity about what I'm saying and about whom.
Have a nice day.
- Cheryl
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: tthiel on Saturday, May 06 2006 @ 10:59 AM MDT
Cheryl is exactly on point, the high cost was due to the number of objections which dramatically increased the amount of time the recount took. According to the article Mr. Becker says "issues" were uncovered... really like what... sometimes people sign their absentee envelop in pencil? So, there is no law against it. That sometimes absentee voters sign on the wrong line? Again, so, the voter intent is still clear. That sometimes a poll worker forgets to sign something? The recount isn't going to make humans error proof. This recount should have taken 2 days, recreate ballots that were too light or used pen and be done. Not an attempt to drum up all kinds of "reasons" to throw out votes.
Amazing how those screaming about wasteful spending feel the need to defend this total waste of taxpayer funds.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: chzhead on Saturday, May 06 2006 @ 12:44 PM MDT
Ok, I agree, it was a waste of money. BUT, if Tony had really been worth that $14000 figure, he would have known what was appropriate and what wasn't. It wasn't pointed out until the last day which objections were worth while and which ones weren't. And all were done by Beckers lawyer. Yes, ballots in pencil were allowed, and signed only by one person, and signed on the wrong line. He should have known that or he shouldn't have been in the room. He also should have known that absentee ballots without applications should not be allowed. None of these issues were brought to light until the last day. A lot of time could have been saved if he had actually knew more about election laws. He then would have been worth the money spent on him. When the city attorney doesn't have experience in a subject, an outside representative is hired to take his place. Why wasn't that done here? It sure could have saved money. Yes, the money spent is appalling. It is horrendous. But some of this could have been avoided and Becker is not the only one to blame here. I know Cheryl and Teresa have an axe to grind with Becker but the blame needs to be shared by the district too.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: admin on Saturday, May 06 2006 @ 01:43 PM MDT
Chzhead, before you go making comments about having axes to grind, please be sure of your facts. I have been a longtime supporter of Dan Becker's (I'm sure you already knew that, though). What I have a problem with is elected officials who have come to be known by their own actions as watchdogs of our tax dollars and those who say they want to make sure every vote is counted, then turning around and doing things which completely contradict the image they've built for themselves. It happens to be a feeling shared by many, so please don't make it look like there are only two of us who feel this way. Understand I have never had an axe to grind with Mr. Becker, only some of his actions during this recount. There is a difference.
- Cheryl
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: admin on Saturday, May 06 2006 @ 05:59 PM MDT
On the Oshkosh News site, Michelle Monte has posted an editorial suggesting an emergency fund be set up or provisions made for things like this recount. Not a bad idea, but is there absolutely no money set aside for a recount – at least a normal one that would last about two or three days? I believe we were originally told the recount would cost between $6,000 and $8,000. Looks to me from the calculations below that they had the recount expense figured about right, were it not for the process being dragged on by so many objections, most of which came from Dan Becker.
Board of Canvassers/Recount workers: $3,656.32
Printing of extra ballots: $668
Dinner for six recount workers on April 13: $31.09
Legal: $14,383.50
City of Oshkosh (consulting, ballot transport, supplies): $591
TOTAL: $19,329.91
- source: Oshkosh Area School District
Mrs. Monte also stated in her editorial that the school district’s attorney made recommendations that were incorrect. It didn’t seem that Mr. Becker and/or his attorney always had all the right answers either, especially since the State Elections Board opined contrary to - and ultimately the Board of Canvassers voted against - some of Becker’s objections.
Finally, Mrs. Monte says “it seems the electoral process is a comedy of errors.” Pretty harsh words, I would say, and what a slap in the face to city clerk Pam Ubrig who, along with her staff, works so hard to get poll workers trained for elections. Mrs. Monte also said “to say that there are errors in every election and the public doesn’t know about them until there is a recount, so it is okay is irresponsible regardless of how true… Now that we know what has happened, we need to fix the problems and work on better procedures. Nothing is perfect, but we need to make the electoral process the best it can be so every vote does get counted and the people in our elected seats belong there.” I don’t think anyone ever said the mistakes were “okay.” I and a few others have simply said you are never going to eliminate all mistakes, no matter how good the training or how careful the individuals are. I have said before we should try to have as flawless an election as possible each time we go to the polls. But poll workers are people who are putting in very long days and doing extremely painstaking and meticulous work. Not signing a ballot, signing something on the wrong line or signing in pencil instead of pen does not mean the election process is flawed overall, nor does it make it a “comedy of errors.” It also does not mean that because mistakes – real or perceived - were made that those votes should be tossed out.
Thankfully in this recount, the votes still counted where voter intent could be determined and the three candidates with the most votes won. After all, isn’t that what we go to the polls for?
- Cheryl
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: tthiel on Saturday, May 06 2006 @ 11:57 PM MDT
As someone who was in the room for the better part of two days, I can tell you that Mr. Renning DID know plenty about election law and when Mr. Becker objected to a ballot signed in pencil or signed on the wrong line or the witness didn't give an address Mr. Renning told the board of canvassars that the law did NOT require a ballot be signed in pen or that a witness give an address. Mr. Renning said repeatedly that the law ONLY requires there be a signature by the voter and the witness. HOWEVER, that did NOT stop Mr. Becker from objecting, he just kept at it and insisted each ballot be marked, many times he asked that his objection be read back to him ---it wasted a lot of time. Furthermore as to the issue of absentee ballots without applications--- according to the State Elections Board, those ballots could in fact have been counted but as you can see from the following excerpt from the minutes (see below)the Board of Canvassars decided to err on the side of caution and NOT count those absentee ballots but the Elections board opined that they could be counted if ... From Official Minutes on April 17:"Absentee Envelopes lacking applications: Mr. Becker’s position was that these votes should not be counted. The State Elections Board has opined that when the intent of the voter is clear, there is no evidence of any fraud and the defect is no fault of the elector, we should count the ballot. There is no way to tell which ballot applies to which absentee voter. Furthermore, the absentee envelopes and electors are on the poll lists. In light of Lee vs. Paulson, the Board of Canvassers has decided to error on the side of caution."The only blame for the excess costs are due to the more than 200! objections made by Mr. Becker. The district did budget $6,000 for election costs. I don't see how you can blame the district for this. Mr. Becker kept making objections no matter what he was told, which caused the recount to drag on and on which ran up the legal fees.
So much for the watchdog for the taxpayers.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: NewVoice on Sunday, May 07 2006 @ 04:56 PM MDT
Deja Vu. So much for intelligent discussion here. It is just a cut and paste of Oshblog. Oh, well.
The "watch dog for the district" did make some good points about moving forward towards the next election and fixing the mistakes that were found this time around. At least someone in this city can get past the blame game and talk common sense about the future since, as Mrs Monte pointed out, we can't change the past, it is time to move on.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: admin on Sunday, May 07 2006 @ 05:13 PM MDT
Actually, New Voice, I believe the discussion started here. But when multiple discussions on the same issue are going on in different places you are bound to get similar comments being made. Your message also seems hauntingly familiar, as is your support for Dan Becker and Michelle Monte. We get that. What a shame you seem to think they are the only ones exercising common sense. Quite the opposite. I happen to think common sense was shown by including votes instead of casting them aside as Mr. Becker wanted to do. Inasmuch as the State Elections Board said votes like many of those Mr. Becker objected to should be counted, I don't know that they can actually be considered "mistakes" that need fixing. You're not, for example, going to "correct" what voters do. Humans being what they are, those types of things are always going to happen.
- Cheryl
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: NewVoice on Monday, May 08 2006 @ 07:22 AM MDT
I was referring to the mistakes with signatures as an example. That CAN be fixed or at the very list paid better attention to. Obviously you have your own personal biases, as is your right.It would seem according to this website that Amy had absolutely no objections, as they are never mentioned. She also objected, admittedly far fewer times, but nevertheless objected. Every one of her objections were, as you put it, in violation of State Elections Board information. I would have to point out that the SEB was not willing to step in on this is they consider it a local issue. Also, case law trumps whatever one of their representatives has to say. SEB can only tell you things according to the statute. Case law is what is followed in court because it is a legal interpretation of the statute.
Regardless, the point should be that we (ie the voters, pollworker, clerks, etc) need to do better in our own ways. I am sorry you feel differently. Apparently I had the wrong idea about this website. Good Day.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: tthiel on Monday, May 08 2006 @ 08:57 AM MDT
New Voice,
What mistakes with signatures are you referring to? There is no requirement that there be 2 poll worker's signature so therefore, no mistake. Amy's only objections were to keep the process consistent, she did not want any vote thrown out but when Mr. Becker started objecting to ballots with only one poll worker's signature and having them pulled BUT then decided against pulling a ballot with only one poll worker's signature but with a vote for him and NO vote for Mrs. Weinsheim she believed that to remain consistent in pulling ballots with only one signature she had to object to that ballot since Mr. Becker wouldn't. She did state on two different occassions that she would be happy to count ALL ballots with only one poll worker's signature so long as it was consistent and ALL those ballots were counted.I'm sure the majority of voters and other thinking people realize that having a recount so you can try and get hundreds of votes thrown out is not a good use of taxpayers' money.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: NewVoice on Monday, May 08 2006 @ 02:50 PM MDT
I'm going to guess that you don't consider those that supported Mr. Becker through the recount are "thinking people." You know what they say about opinions...
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: admin on Monday, May 08 2006 @ 10:02 AM MDT
New Voice, I don't know why you think I have the opinion we can't do better. I've repeatedly stated that we should try to be as flawless as possible. But common sense should tell you that human beings are not flawless, therefore, neither will elections be.The other point I would make is actually a question about your comment that the State Elections Board opinions are trumped by case law. Why did Mr. Becker not sue the district then if he felt that SEB was wrong and Board of Canvassers erred by following the SEB's opinion?
- Cheryl
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: NewVoice on Monday, May 08 2006 @ 02:57 PM MDT
SEB wasn't wrong, per say. They had the statute correct, however, interpretation is not up to them as they will tell you if you call, it is up to the judicial system. Case law stated that ballots with one signature are admissible and absentee ballots with no application are not, regardless of voter intent. If there is no application, how can there be a ballot?As for human error, you are correct, nothing is flawless. However, we should always strive as errored human beings to do better and not make excuses. Excuses and blaming do not change what already has happened. Perseverence prevents past errors from recurring and diligence minimizes future errors. That is my only point.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: admin on Monday, May 08 2006 @ 05:17 PM MDT
Then I ask again why Mr. Becker did not proceed to the judicial level with his objections.
- Cheryl
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: Target on Monday, May 08 2006 @ 07:31 PM MDT
You would like that wouldn't you... then you could drag him through the MUD some more. Get over it. You refuse to listen to any point of view that is not your own. You continue to spin (or should I say twist, distort, outright change) to suite your needs. Becker didn't have any votes thrown out. He objected to the BAG not being signed and when that was allowed, he renewed a consistancy objection everytime your golden girl objected for a signature. Time to READ the minutes. I wasn't there but I can read. Is there a point in our future that we will be done pissing on this issue. The recount was necessary. It cost money, and alot of it. The lawyer cost the most. I think that a paralegal could have done an equal job for much less. At least a paralegal would have made calls when presented with information instead of waiting until the day was over. I don't think that there would have been more than a 30% difference even without your insistance on 200+ objections. For those that are mathmatically challenged, that means it would still have been more than $13000.
Here is a thought, do you think that a lawyer could have been on call? Answered questions by phone? Came to the recount when needed? Was Beckers lawyer there throughout the whole thing or was he on call during the recount? MMMM, I wonder.
//Target//
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: tthiel on Monday, May 08 2006 @ 09:22 PM MDT
A paralegal cannot give legal advice, that is against the law.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: NewVoice on Tuesday, May 09 2006 @ 11:16 PM MDT
They can research and present to the lawyer case law. That is their job.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: admin on Monday, May 08 2006 @ 10:22 PM MDT
Oh my dear Target, nothing has been spun, twisted, distorted or outright changed. If you believe so, please provide us some actual examples. You say you can read and that Mr. Becker didn't have any votes thrown out. I'm glad you can read, but apparently you don't do it nearly as carefully as you should or you would not have made the assertion you did. Fact is, I don't recall saying that Dan Becker had votes thrown out. That does not, however, change the fact that he tried, and that was after pursuing a recount to make sure every vote was counted, I thought. Quite a change in philosophies, I would say.
I have agreed all along that the recount was necessary. What was not necessary, in my opinion, were the incessant objections by Mr. Becker. Also, your reference to my "golden girl" - if directed at me - is very presumptuous on your part. As most know, I have been a longtime supporter of Mr. Becker's. If you would read, you would know that. But here again, I guess the fact that you CAN doesn't necessarily mean that you DO. As to your mathematical prowess, anyone can pull numbers out of a hat as you have done here with 30 percent, etc. You are making assumptions about how much time was eaten up with all those objections when you readily admit you weren't there. I don't know how this particular lawyer for the district billed, but most lawyers bill in 6-minute increments. That adds up quickly. I think Mrs. Thiel addressed your other comments about paralegals, etc.
- Cheryl
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: NewVoice on Monday, May 08 2006 @ 08:15 PM MDT
I do not know. Don't take this the wrong way, but I thought of you as a journalist. Could you ask Mr. Becker directly? I hope my assumptions about you aren't wrong. I didn't see you as the type to just take gratuitous pot shots like others on the internet like to do under the guise of anonymous. Since you sign your name to your posts, I would think you would have higher standards of investigative journalism. Since I am not Mr. Becker, nor am I a public personality with a talkshow professing to "keep our eye on Oshkosh." If you really want to get to the bottom of things, I would recommend foregoing third party whining and go straight to the sources in question for answers. I'm not a journalist, so what do I know.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: admin on Monday, May 08 2006 @ 10:28 PM MDT
Sorry New Voice, there are no gratuituous pot shots being taken, at least by me and I don't think by many - both here and in other places. This is called having a conversation. I don't get paid for this and am usually pretty busy making calls on things I DO get paid for. My apologies for not having the 28 hours in a day you must think I either have or should have. Also you would look smarter by leaving the "investigative journalist" cracks out of your remarks. You see, it was and continues to be anonymous people and those with made-up monikers like yourself who started referring me to as an investigative journalist. I never attached the word "investigative" to my profession. If people want to take potshots at my professional abilities they should at least be accurate about what I do. Otherwise their credibility is lost. You suggested I could call Mr. Becker directly. So could any citizen concerned about these issues. But I can, have and will continue to wonder "aloud" about things, like everyone else. Likewise, I know Mr. Becker logs in here and sees what's being discussed. He could just as easily answer the questions people are asking. In addition, I am sure you've heard of such a thing as a rhetorical question.
- Cheryl
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: admin on Tuesday, May 09 2006 @ 07:48 AM MDT
In this morning's Oshkosh Northwestern, the editorial board opined that Dan Becker is now virtually unelectable because of the more than $19,000 it cost for the recent school board election recount.
In the piece, the newspaper’s editorialists pointed out some of the same things that people like me, my co-host Tony Palmeri and former school board member Teresa Thiel have been saying over the past several days: that the recount was like no other this community has seen before; that the recount costs were driven significantly higher by repeated objections by Dan Becker; and that this ridiculously expensive recount essentially “uncovered” nothing but that poll workers are human being and, as such, fallible.
I must agree with Tony, who is also discussing this editorial on his blog, that it is unlikely the cost of the recount will make Dan Becker unelectable, but rather the fact that he tried to have hundreds of votes thrown out during this recount. And yet, voters have a way of being forgiving (or is it that we “forget” about certain things?), especially after enough time has passed. You can be sure though, that if Dan runs again, some opponent will politely remind us that candidate Dan Becker tried to have many people's votes tossed in the election of 2006, and that, among them, might have been yours.
- Cheryl
The recount was originally projected to cost between $6,000 and $8,000, but actual costs are said to be just over $19,000, mostly due to the expense associated with having legal counsel for the district present throughout the entire five-day recount.
I believe with such a close election the recount itself was justified, but I do not believe all the challenges or objections raised by Dan Becker were justified, or judicious on his part. Becker says the expense, though high, was worth it because it uncovered some "issues" within our current electoral system. What did it really uncover?
It uncovered no election or voter fraud nor any voter intimidation, but rather mistakes, pure and simple, which have and will continue to happen in every single election. While mistakes in the next election may well be different from the ones that happened in this one, mistakes will still occur. They cannot be avoided when you are dealing with human beings – especially ones who work long hours and are dealing with very tedious work.
The bottom line is I believe the costs were driven higher by persistent candidate objections despite the fact that it was very clear what the voter intent was in a large number of those cases. Unfortunately I think this recount uncovered more than just perceived “issues” with the system.
- Cheryl
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: chzhead on Saturday, May 06 2006 @ 06:20 AM MDT
By all means Cheryl, tell us how you feel. Nothing like reporting facts and not your personnal feelings towards the situation.The cost was to have a lawyer in the room ($14,000 of the $19,000).That is about 3/4 of the money going to a lawyer to sit in a chair and give poor advice. That was also by choice of the district, it was not required. So the cost would have been there regardless of the number of objections. Give us a break on your opinions please.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: admin on Saturday, May 06 2006 @ 08:43 AM MDT
Your post is unclear, much like some of your other ramblings. What I posted contained both fact and opinion - that is the point of blogs. Sorry you missed that lesson they day they taught it.
You say the district's attorney gave poor advice. That is your opinion. Unfortunately for you and your "side," that attorney's advice seems to have been largely supported by opinions from the State Elections Board. I suspect that's why the Board of Canvassers ruled as it did.
And the simple fact remains that if there had not been so many persistent objections this recount would not have taken as long as it did and the district would not have incurred the high bill it did (taxpayers are footing the bill, lest I remind you).
Finally, let me see if I have this right: You can offer your opinions, but not me because they're different from yours, huh? That's not the way things work. But here's a simple solution to you problem: If you don't like my opinions, don't read them. Nothing is forcing you to do so other than your obvious burning curiosity about what I'm saying and about whom.
Have a nice day.
- Cheryl
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: tthiel on Saturday, May 06 2006 @ 10:59 AM MDT
Cheryl is exactly on point, the high cost was due to the number of objections which dramatically increased the amount of time the recount took. According to the article Mr. Becker says "issues" were uncovered... really like what... sometimes people sign their absentee envelop in pencil? So, there is no law against it. That sometimes absentee voters sign on the wrong line? Again, so, the voter intent is still clear. That sometimes a poll worker forgets to sign something? The recount isn't going to make humans error proof. This recount should have taken 2 days, recreate ballots that were too light or used pen and be done. Not an attempt to drum up all kinds of "reasons" to throw out votes.
Amazing how those screaming about wasteful spending feel the need to defend this total waste of taxpayer funds.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: chzhead on Saturday, May 06 2006 @ 12:44 PM MDT
Ok, I agree, it was a waste of money. BUT, if Tony had really been worth that $14000 figure, he would have known what was appropriate and what wasn't. It wasn't pointed out until the last day which objections were worth while and which ones weren't. And all were done by Beckers lawyer. Yes, ballots in pencil were allowed, and signed only by one person, and signed on the wrong line. He should have known that or he shouldn't have been in the room. He also should have known that absentee ballots without applications should not be allowed. None of these issues were brought to light until the last day. A lot of time could have been saved if he had actually knew more about election laws. He then would have been worth the money spent on him. When the city attorney doesn't have experience in a subject, an outside representative is hired to take his place. Why wasn't that done here? It sure could have saved money. Yes, the money spent is appalling. It is horrendous. But some of this could have been avoided and Becker is not the only one to blame here. I know Cheryl and Teresa have an axe to grind with Becker but the blame needs to be shared by the district too.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: admin on Saturday, May 06 2006 @ 01:43 PM MDT
Chzhead, before you go making comments about having axes to grind, please be sure of your facts. I have been a longtime supporter of Dan Becker's (I'm sure you already knew that, though). What I have a problem with is elected officials who have come to be known by their own actions as watchdogs of our tax dollars and those who say they want to make sure every vote is counted, then turning around and doing things which completely contradict the image they've built for themselves. It happens to be a feeling shared by many, so please don't make it look like there are only two of us who feel this way. Understand I have never had an axe to grind with Mr. Becker, only some of his actions during this recount. There is a difference.
- Cheryl
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: admin on Saturday, May 06 2006 @ 05:59 PM MDT
On the Oshkosh News site, Michelle Monte has posted an editorial suggesting an emergency fund be set up or provisions made for things like this recount. Not a bad idea, but is there absolutely no money set aside for a recount – at least a normal one that would last about two or three days? I believe we were originally told the recount would cost between $6,000 and $8,000. Looks to me from the calculations below that they had the recount expense figured about right, were it not for the process being dragged on by so many objections, most of which came from Dan Becker.
Board of Canvassers/Recount workers: $3,656.32
Printing of extra ballots: $668
Dinner for six recount workers on April 13: $31.09
Legal: $14,383.50
City of Oshkosh (consulting, ballot transport, supplies): $591
TOTAL: $19,329.91
- source: Oshkosh Area School District
Mrs. Monte also stated in her editorial that the school district’s attorney made recommendations that were incorrect. It didn’t seem that Mr. Becker and/or his attorney always had all the right answers either, especially since the State Elections Board opined contrary to - and ultimately the Board of Canvassers voted against - some of Becker’s objections.
Finally, Mrs. Monte says “it seems the electoral process is a comedy of errors.” Pretty harsh words, I would say, and what a slap in the face to city clerk Pam Ubrig who, along with her staff, works so hard to get poll workers trained for elections. Mrs. Monte also said “to say that there are errors in every election and the public doesn’t know about them until there is a recount, so it is okay is irresponsible regardless of how true… Now that we know what has happened, we need to fix the problems and work on better procedures. Nothing is perfect, but we need to make the electoral process the best it can be so every vote does get counted and the people in our elected seats belong there.” I don’t think anyone ever said the mistakes were “okay.” I and a few others have simply said you are never going to eliminate all mistakes, no matter how good the training or how careful the individuals are. I have said before we should try to have as flawless an election as possible each time we go to the polls. But poll workers are people who are putting in very long days and doing extremely painstaking and meticulous work. Not signing a ballot, signing something on the wrong line or signing in pencil instead of pen does not mean the election process is flawed overall, nor does it make it a “comedy of errors.” It also does not mean that because mistakes – real or perceived - were made that those votes should be tossed out.
Thankfully in this recount, the votes still counted where voter intent could be determined and the three candidates with the most votes won. After all, isn’t that what we go to the polls for?
- Cheryl
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: tthiel on Saturday, May 06 2006 @ 11:57 PM MDT
As someone who was in the room for the better part of two days, I can tell you that Mr. Renning DID know plenty about election law and when Mr. Becker objected to a ballot signed in pencil or signed on the wrong line or the witness didn't give an address Mr. Renning told the board of canvassars that the law did NOT require a ballot be signed in pen or that a witness give an address. Mr. Renning said repeatedly that the law ONLY requires there be a signature by the voter and the witness. HOWEVER, that did NOT stop Mr. Becker from objecting, he just kept at it and insisted each ballot be marked, many times he asked that his objection be read back to him ---it wasted a lot of time. Furthermore as to the issue of absentee ballots without applications--- according to the State Elections Board, those ballots could in fact have been counted but as you can see from the following excerpt from the minutes (see below)the Board of Canvassars decided to err on the side of caution and NOT count those absentee ballots but the Elections board opined that they could be counted if ... From Official Minutes on April 17:"Absentee Envelopes lacking applications: Mr. Becker’s position was that these votes should not be counted. The State Elections Board has opined that when the intent of the voter is clear, there is no evidence of any fraud and the defect is no fault of the elector, we should count the ballot. There is no way to tell which ballot applies to which absentee voter. Furthermore, the absentee envelopes and electors are on the poll lists. In light of Lee vs. Paulson, the Board of Canvassers has decided to error on the side of caution."The only blame for the excess costs are due to the more than 200! objections made by Mr. Becker. The district did budget $6,000 for election costs. I don't see how you can blame the district for this. Mr. Becker kept making objections no matter what he was told, which caused the recount to drag on and on which ran up the legal fees.
So much for the watchdog for the taxpayers.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: NewVoice on Sunday, May 07 2006 @ 04:56 PM MDT
Deja Vu. So much for intelligent discussion here. It is just a cut and paste of Oshblog. Oh, well.
The "watch dog for the district" did make some good points about moving forward towards the next election and fixing the mistakes that were found this time around. At least someone in this city can get past the blame game and talk common sense about the future since, as Mrs Monte pointed out, we can't change the past, it is time to move on.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: admin on Sunday, May 07 2006 @ 05:13 PM MDT
Actually, New Voice, I believe the discussion started here. But when multiple discussions on the same issue are going on in different places you are bound to get similar comments being made. Your message also seems hauntingly familiar, as is your support for Dan Becker and Michelle Monte. We get that. What a shame you seem to think they are the only ones exercising common sense. Quite the opposite. I happen to think common sense was shown by including votes instead of casting them aside as Mr. Becker wanted to do. Inasmuch as the State Elections Board said votes like many of those Mr. Becker objected to should be counted, I don't know that they can actually be considered "mistakes" that need fixing. You're not, for example, going to "correct" what voters do. Humans being what they are, those types of things are always going to happen.
- Cheryl
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: NewVoice on Monday, May 08 2006 @ 07:22 AM MDT
I was referring to the mistakes with signatures as an example. That CAN be fixed or at the very list paid better attention to. Obviously you have your own personal biases, as is your right.It would seem according to this website that Amy had absolutely no objections, as they are never mentioned. She also objected, admittedly far fewer times, but nevertheless objected. Every one of her objections were, as you put it, in violation of State Elections Board information. I would have to point out that the SEB was not willing to step in on this is they consider it a local issue. Also, case law trumps whatever one of their representatives has to say. SEB can only tell you things according to the statute. Case law is what is followed in court because it is a legal interpretation of the statute.
Regardless, the point should be that we (ie the voters, pollworker, clerks, etc) need to do better in our own ways. I am sorry you feel differently. Apparently I had the wrong idea about this website. Good Day.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: tthiel on Monday, May 08 2006 @ 08:57 AM MDT
New Voice,
What mistakes with signatures are you referring to? There is no requirement that there be 2 poll worker's signature so therefore, no mistake. Amy's only objections were to keep the process consistent, she did not want any vote thrown out but when Mr. Becker started objecting to ballots with only one poll worker's signature and having them pulled BUT then decided against pulling a ballot with only one poll worker's signature but with a vote for him and NO vote for Mrs. Weinsheim she believed that to remain consistent in pulling ballots with only one signature she had to object to that ballot since Mr. Becker wouldn't. She did state on two different occassions that she would be happy to count ALL ballots with only one poll worker's signature so long as it was consistent and ALL those ballots were counted.I'm sure the majority of voters and other thinking people realize that having a recount so you can try and get hundreds of votes thrown out is not a good use of taxpayers' money.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: NewVoice on Monday, May 08 2006 @ 02:50 PM MDT
I'm going to guess that you don't consider those that supported Mr. Becker through the recount are "thinking people." You know what they say about opinions...
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: admin on Monday, May 08 2006 @ 10:02 AM MDT
New Voice, I don't know why you think I have the opinion we can't do better. I've repeatedly stated that we should try to be as flawless as possible. But common sense should tell you that human beings are not flawless, therefore, neither will elections be.The other point I would make is actually a question about your comment that the State Elections Board opinions are trumped by case law. Why did Mr. Becker not sue the district then if he felt that SEB was wrong and Board of Canvassers erred by following the SEB's opinion?
- Cheryl
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: NewVoice on Monday, May 08 2006 @ 02:57 PM MDT
SEB wasn't wrong, per say. They had the statute correct, however, interpretation is not up to them as they will tell you if you call, it is up to the judicial system. Case law stated that ballots with one signature are admissible and absentee ballots with no application are not, regardless of voter intent. If there is no application, how can there be a ballot?As for human error, you are correct, nothing is flawless. However, we should always strive as errored human beings to do better and not make excuses. Excuses and blaming do not change what already has happened. Perseverence prevents past errors from recurring and diligence minimizes future errors. That is my only point.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: admin on Monday, May 08 2006 @ 05:17 PM MDT
Then I ask again why Mr. Becker did not proceed to the judicial level with his objections.
- Cheryl
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: Target on Monday, May 08 2006 @ 07:31 PM MDT
You would like that wouldn't you... then you could drag him through the MUD some more. Get over it. You refuse to listen to any point of view that is not your own. You continue to spin (or should I say twist, distort, outright change) to suite your needs. Becker didn't have any votes thrown out. He objected to the BAG not being signed and when that was allowed, he renewed a consistancy objection everytime your golden girl objected for a signature. Time to READ the minutes. I wasn't there but I can read. Is there a point in our future that we will be done pissing on this issue. The recount was necessary. It cost money, and alot of it. The lawyer cost the most. I think that a paralegal could have done an equal job for much less. At least a paralegal would have made calls when presented with information instead of waiting until the day was over. I don't think that there would have been more than a 30% difference even without your insistance on 200+ objections. For those that are mathmatically challenged, that means it would still have been more than $13000.
Here is a thought, do you think that a lawyer could have been on call? Answered questions by phone? Came to the recount when needed? Was Beckers lawyer there throughout the whole thing or was he on call during the recount? MMMM, I wonder.
//Target//
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: tthiel on Monday, May 08 2006 @ 09:22 PM MDT
A paralegal cannot give legal advice, that is against the law.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: NewVoice on Tuesday, May 09 2006 @ 11:16 PM MDT
They can research and present to the lawyer case law. That is their job.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: admin on Monday, May 08 2006 @ 10:22 PM MDT
Oh my dear Target, nothing has been spun, twisted, distorted or outright changed. If you believe so, please provide us some actual examples. You say you can read and that Mr. Becker didn't have any votes thrown out. I'm glad you can read, but apparently you don't do it nearly as carefully as you should or you would not have made the assertion you did. Fact is, I don't recall saying that Dan Becker had votes thrown out. That does not, however, change the fact that he tried, and that was after pursuing a recount to make sure every vote was counted, I thought. Quite a change in philosophies, I would say.
I have agreed all along that the recount was necessary. What was not necessary, in my opinion, were the incessant objections by Mr. Becker. Also, your reference to my "golden girl" - if directed at me - is very presumptuous on your part. As most know, I have been a longtime supporter of Mr. Becker's. If you would read, you would know that. But here again, I guess the fact that you CAN doesn't necessarily mean that you DO. As to your mathematical prowess, anyone can pull numbers out of a hat as you have done here with 30 percent, etc. You are making assumptions about how much time was eaten up with all those objections when you readily admit you weren't there. I don't know how this particular lawyer for the district billed, but most lawyers bill in 6-minute increments. That adds up quickly. I think Mrs. Thiel addressed your other comments about paralegals, etc.
- Cheryl
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: NewVoice on Monday, May 08 2006 @ 08:15 PM MDT
I do not know. Don't take this the wrong way, but I thought of you as a journalist. Could you ask Mr. Becker directly? I hope my assumptions about you aren't wrong. I didn't see you as the type to just take gratuitous pot shots like others on the internet like to do under the guise of anonymous. Since you sign your name to your posts, I would think you would have higher standards of investigative journalism. Since I am not Mr. Becker, nor am I a public personality with a talkshow professing to "keep our eye on Oshkosh." If you really want to get to the bottom of things, I would recommend foregoing third party whining and go straight to the sources in question for answers. I'm not a journalist, so what do I know.
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: admin on Monday, May 08 2006 @ 10:28 PM MDT
Sorry New Voice, there are no gratuituous pot shots being taken, at least by me and I don't think by many - both here and in other places. This is called having a conversation. I don't get paid for this and am usually pretty busy making calls on things I DO get paid for. My apologies for not having the 28 hours in a day you must think I either have or should have. Also you would look smarter by leaving the "investigative journalist" cracks out of your remarks. You see, it was and continues to be anonymous people and those with made-up monikers like yourself who started referring me to as an investigative journalist. I never attached the word "investigative" to my profession. If people want to take potshots at my professional abilities they should at least be accurate about what I do. Otherwise their credibility is lost. You suggested I could call Mr. Becker directly. So could any citizen concerned about these issues. But I can, have and will continue to wonder "aloud" about things, like everyone else. Likewise, I know Mr. Becker logs in here and sees what's being discussed. He could just as easily answer the questions people are asking. In addition, I am sure you've heard of such a thing as a rhetorical question.
- Cheryl
School board election recount costs three times more than first estimated
Authored by: admin on Tuesday, May 09 2006 @ 07:48 AM MDT
In this morning's Oshkosh Northwestern, the editorial board opined that Dan Becker is now virtually unelectable because of the more than $19,000 it cost for the recent school board election recount.
In the piece, the newspaper’s editorialists pointed out some of the same things that people like me, my co-host Tony Palmeri and former school board member Teresa Thiel have been saying over the past several days: that the recount was like no other this community has seen before; that the recount costs were driven significantly higher by repeated objections by Dan Becker; and that this ridiculously expensive recount essentially “uncovered” nothing but that poll workers are human being and, as such, fallible.
I must agree with Tony, who is also discussing this editorial on his blog, that it is unlikely the cost of the recount will make Dan Becker unelectable, but rather the fact that he tried to have hundreds of votes thrown out during this recount. And yet, voters have a way of being forgiving (or is it that we “forget” about certain things?), especially after enough time has passed. You can be sure though, that if Dan runs again, some opponent will politely remind us that candidate Dan Becker tried to have many people's votes tossed in the election of 2006, and that, among them, might have been yours.
- Cheryl
posted by Cheryl Hentz at 8:44 PM
<< Home