July
11, 2004
Greg Nelson, General Manager
Department of Neighborhood
Empowerment
334-B East Second Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Dear Mr. Nelson,
As a candidate for the
office of At-Large Board Member in the June 27, 2004, Grass Roots Venice
Neighborhood Council (GRVNC) election I would like to challenge the election as
per the GRVNC election procedures Article XIII, section B (see attachment 5).
My challenge is to the
legitimacy of the entire election based on the GRVNC Board’s failure to adhere
the GRVNC bylaws and official election procedures during the notification
period and execution of the election.
I request that results of the June 27 election be set aside and new
elections be conducted under the supervision of DONE that follow the best
practices election procedures drafted by the DONE sponsored Election Procedures
Working Group.
Please find below a summary
of my challenges followed by the details of each on pages 2-5. Attachments and links to attachments can be
found on pages 6-24. My challenges are:
A) The GRVNC Board has conducted
an election without timely and accurate notification of the election procedures
to the Venice community.
B) No duly
appointed Independent Election Administrator was responsible for administering
the election.
C) Two items of business were conducted during the
annual Election meeting in violation of the bylaws.
D) The election
meeting was not properly called to order with a quorum of the officers.
E) Failure to
notify absentee voters that no absentee voting would occur.
Only
through fair and open elections that involve all Venice stakeholders can the
legitimacy of the GRVNC be guaranteed.
We Venice stakeholders have a tremendous love for our community and an
enthusiasm for solving its problems.
Through well-publicized and open elections this energy can be harnessed
for the benefit of all.
Sincerely,
Richard Myers
At-Large Candidate for GRVNC Board
Challenge Details:
A) The GRVNC Board has conducted an election without timely and accurate notification of the election procedures to the Venice community.
Many of the election
procedures communicated were contradictory, confusing and based on unapproved
election bylaws. The GRVNC Board
continued to make changes in the election procedures and did not approve final
election procedures until June 14, thirteen days before the election. During the 90-day period leading up to the
election, the Board communicated at various times election procedures to
stakeholders that differed dramatically from the procedures actually used for
the election. The changes of election
personnel added to the stakeholder’s confusion.
DONE has not approved any of
the 2004 election procedures communicated to stakeholders, nor has DONE
approved the final election procedures used for the election. On May 25th and June 11th
DONE asked the GRVNC Board to delay the election and suggested mechanisms
within the GRVNC bylaws for doing so (see attachments 8 and 9). DONE’s requests were ignored.
Timeline:
In
April 2004, the GRVNC Board published and widely distributed a quarterly
newsletter containing election procedures (see attachment 1) for the June 27,
2004 election that were unapproved. The
procedures described in the newsletter include the following details:
·
Vote-by-mail
including application form
·
Instant
Runoff Voting
·
No
credentials required to prove stakeholder status
·
Candidates
filing deadline of May 27
On
April 22, 2004, the GRVNC Board approved election procedures (see attachment 2)
for submission to DONE and supporting election bylaws changes. The election bylaws changes required
ratification by the stakeholders to be valid.
These bylaws changes have not yet been ratified. The election procedures included:
·
Vote-by-mail
·
Instant
Runoff Voting
·
No
credentials required to prove stakeholder status
·
60
day outreach and notification requirement
·
League
of Women Voters to serve as Independent Election Administrator
·
Candidates
filing deadline of May 27
On
May 20, 2004, the GRVNC Board again approved new election procedures (see
attachment 3) because the April 22 election procedures could not be used with
out stakeholder ratification of the supporting election bylaws changes. The GRVNC Board submitted new procedures
that included the following corrections:
·
Stakeholder
status must be proven on election day by showing credentials
·
60
day outreach and notification requirement removed
On
May 27, 2004, the deadline for declaring candidacy for June 27 election, the
GRVNC Election Committee Chair Tom O’Meara sent an email informing candidates
that the upcoming election would likely be delayed for 90 days. (See attachment 4)
On
June 3, 2004, the GRVNC Executive Committee nominated Paul Ryan as new Election
Committee Chair to replace Mr. O’Meara who resigned the position.
On
June 7, 2004, the GRVNC Board approves Paul Ryan as new Election Committee
Chair.
On June 14, 2004, the GRVNC Board again made changes
to the election procedures (see attachment 5).
These procedures significantly modified the May 20th election
procedures which had been previously communicated to the stakeholders. The following changes were made:
·
Vote-by-mail
procedures were eliminated
·
Candidate
filing deadline was extended to June 21
·
A
simultaneous by-law amendment ratification vote was scheduled
·
Plurality
voting to be used instead of Instant Runoff Voting.
No properly noticed Brown Act meetings were held by
the GRVNC Elections Committee to discuss the new election procedures in a
public forum before they were presented to the GRVNC Board for a vote. A similar situation existed in 2003 when
DONE instructed the GRVNC election committee that they must meet to discuss any
election changes in an open forum or lose DONE support for the election.
B) No duly appointed Independent Election
Administrator responsible for administering the election.
According to the final GRVNC
election procedures, an Independent Election Administrator with ultimate
responsibility for the election must be either the League of Women Voters or
should they refuse, the Election Committee Chair. Because the League of Women Voters refused, the Election
Committee Chair should have administered the election. A third party not envisioned by the election
procedures instead was appointed to administer the election.
Following the resignation of
Paul Ryan (see attachment 10), the last GRVNC Board approved Election Committee
Chair, the GRVNC Board failed to approve a newly nominated Election Committee
Chair. Instead, in an Executive Committee Meeting on June 25, two days before
the election, GRVNC Treasurer Jim Smith nominated Casey Peters as the new IEA, which
the GRVNC Executive Committee approved, but not the GRVNC Board. This action
was also in violation of the Brown Act, since no such action item was agendized
for the June 25th Executive Meeting (see attachment 7).
I also have reason to
believe that payment was negotiated for the IEA with out proper Board
discussion or approval. Attempts to
verify this fact with the treasurer and IEA have been unsuccessful. If the GRVNC Board made any payment to the
IEA it should have been discussed and voted on. Payment made to the IEA by any other parties acting independently
of the GRVNC would create a conflict of interest and should be investigated.
Timeline:
On
June 25, 2004, Paul Ryan resigned as Election Committee Chair and as
Independent Election Administrator.
On June 25, 2004, the GRVNC
Executive Committee nominated Sabrina Venskus
to replace Paul Ryan as Elections Committee Chair. The Executive Committee also appointed Casey Peters as
Independent Election Administrator in violation of the election
procedures.
Article IV reads: “The
League of Women Voters shall serve as the IEA.” The procedure goes on to say
“In the event that the IEA is unable or refuses to perform any of the
responsibilities delegated to the IEA by these elections procedures, the GRVNC
Elections Committee Chairperson shall bear the responsibilities.” At this point, an Elections Committee Chair
had been nominated but not approved by the Board as required by the
Bylaws. If approved by the Board,
Sabrina Venskus could have been
the IEA, but no other.
On June 27, 2004, the GRVNC
annual election meeting was held at Westminster Elementary School with Casey
Peters acting as Independent Election Administrator. In addition to electing Board members, ratification of the April
22 bylaws was also performed.
On July 3, 2004, during the
candidate ballot review I recall that Casey Peters commented that he expected
to be reimbursed for his work as IEA. I
subsequently emailed Casey asking for verification of this statement but have
not received a response.
On July 7, 2004, I emailed GRVNC treasurer Jim Smith asking for the details of the contract between the GRVNC Board and Casey Peters. Mr. Smith replied to me that the official election procedures were the only place that described the Boards contract with the IEA. No further clarification about payment to the IEA has been forthcoming.
Only July 10, 2004, Casey
Peters issued the final Election Canvas (Attachment 11).
C) Two items of business were conducted during the annual Election
meeting in violation of the bylaws.
GRVNC bylaws Article VI, Section A, states: “Elections
for the GRVNC Board of Officers shall be held annually at the June GRVNC
Election meeting. The only order of business at the annual Election Meeting
shall be the election of the Board of Officers.”
In his Final Official
Certified Canvas submitted to GRVNC and DONE on July 9th, 2004, Mr.
Casey reported the following:
“Two separate elections were conducted
concurrently in the same large room. There were two ballots, with separate
ballot boxes for each election. One was the election of officers and
representatives for the Grass Roots Venice Neighborhood Council. The second
was on ratification of proposed GRVNC By-Laws amendments. Voters received
the candidate ballot first, and after casting that (or, in a few cases,
disposing of it), went to the next table to turn in a certificate to pick up a
By-Laws ballot. A few voters participated in only one or the other
election, but almost all voted in both.”
GRVNC scheduled two orders
of business on the same day, in the same room, at the same time and in the same
election process. Both the election of the board of officers, and the election
to ratify the bylaws were held at the June 27th election. Ratifying bylaws is clearly an additional
order of business and prohibited by the bylaws. The bylaws election was announced on June 26, one day before the
actual election (see attachment 6).
D) The election meeting was not properly called to order with a quorum of the officers.
GRVNC again violated it’s own bylaws, specifically
Article IV, Section H, which states, in part:
“A minimum of eleven (11) of the twenty-one (21) GRVNC
Officers shall be required at Board and GRNVC general meetings for a quorum to
be present.”
No quorum of Board Officers was present and no GRVNC
Election Meeting was called to order.
There were only nine (9) GRNVC Board Members present when stakeholders
were allowed to begin casting ballots at 10 am - Lydia Poncé, Suzanne Thompson, Sheila Bernard, Sabrina Venskus, Tom O'Meara , Geofrey Collins, Jim Smith, Peggy Lee Kennedy and Alice Stek.
E) Failure to notify absentee voters that no absentee voting would occur.
To my knowledge, no effort was made to notify stakeholders
that requested absentee ballots based on the April GRVNC Quarterly Newsletter
that no absentee voting would occur.
Stakeholder that requested from the League of Women Voters an absentee
ballot should have been notified by mail that no such absentee voting would
occur.
Attachments:
Attachment 1: GRVNC Spring 2004 Newsletter
http://www.grvnc.org/NewSite/Commitees/TownHall/VGR0404.pdf
Attachment 2: April 22, Election Procedures submitted to DONE
http://grvnc.org/NewSite/Commitees/Elections2004/GRVNCElection04_SubmittedToDone.htm
Attachment 3: May 20, Election Procedures approved by
GRVNC Board
http://www.grvnc.org/NewSite/Commitees/Elections2004/GRVNC.Election.Procedures.5.24.04.corrected.htm
Attachment 4: May 27 letter from GRVNC Election
Committee Chair to candidates
Subject:
DONE Letter
From: Thomas O'Meara
Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 19:16:46 -0700 (PDT)
To: runners@grvnc.org
Dear GRVNC Declared (or almost declared) Candidates:
The Los Angeles Department of Neighborhood Empowerment
has sent the board a letter saying it has concerns
with the Election taking place as scheduled on June
27th.
They are asking GRVNC to first amend the bylaws
to allow the election to take place at least 90 days
later than June 27 to give them time to analyze
the new set of bylaws sent to them this week.
Read the letter here:
http://grvnc.org/NewSite/News/News2004/Venice-5-26-04.pdf
Therefore, the executive committee has added an extra
meeting next week where it will likely order me
to suspend election activites until the board meets
to consider DONE's request.
This is a common sense point in time to halt, as the
deadline for declaring is today and immediately now
the voter guide would have been prepared with
candidate
statements etc to be distributed around Venice. This
is a time consuming and costly, and would have
generated much confusion if the announcement of any
postponenment were to follow immediately after.
I will post the statements and pictures that I have
so far (unless you tell me to wait). Please continue
to send in your credentials and Stakeholder
Declaration forms to the League of Women Voters.
As always, please email me with questions and
thanks for your patience and understanding.
Tom
Election Committee Chair
Attachment 5: Final
election procedures used for June 27 election
http://www.grvnc.org/NewSite/Commitees/Elections2004/GRVNC.Election.Procedures.6.11.04.pdf
Attachment 6: June 26 annoucement of bylaws election on June 27
Subject:
[grvnc] Candidate Election, Board Meeting, Special Bylaws Election
From:
Thomas O'Meara <omearatom@yahoo.com>
Date:
Sat, 26 Jun 2004 11:01:41 -0700 (PDT)
Grass Roots Venice Neighborhood Council Announcement#################################################### GRVNC Candidate Election* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 10:00 AM - 4:00 PMSunday, June 27Westminster Elementary School1010 Abbot Kinney BlvdVenice All voters must bring identification which showsthey are Venice Stakeholders. For the complete listof acceptable documents, visit the election page athttp://grvnc.org/NewSite/june27.htm Candidate Information:http://grvnc.org/NewSite/june27.htm GRVNC Board Meeting* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 7:00 PMMonday, June 28Vera Davis Center610 California Ave Agenda Highlight: Amending the bylaws to have a new election in a least 90 days and to essentially reduce the terms of those elected on Sunday, June 27 to serve until this election. The executive committee placed this on the board agenda to address both the concerns of DONE, who wanted the next election to have rules that were fully vetted by them, and the concerns of those on the board who did not want the GRVNC board to loose a quorum (ability to meet)before the next election. Full agenda un-available at email time. GRVNC Special Bylaws Election* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 10:00 AM - 4:00 PMSunday, June 27Westminster Elementary School Special election to approvethe April 7 board amended bylaws to: 1) Allowing board members to remain in office during election challenges 2) Requiring stakholders who don't live, work, orown property in Venice to be regular and activein community groups, instead of just participants. 3) Changing to Mar Vista Community Council (and many others) practice of requiring onlyself-affirmation of stakeholder status. 4) Equalizing distribution of work among ExecutiveOfficers 5) Affirming same day voter registration. 6) Splitting the Communication and Outreach Committee into two separate committees. 7) Incorporation of Voting Methods Committee report into the bylaws, giving GRVNC voters the opportunity to vote by Instant Runoff Voting for Single seatelections and Cumulative voting for At-large seats. http://grvnc.org/NewSite/Commitees/ArchiveCommitee/VotingCommittee.html All of these provisions passed the board by 2/3 majority, and the board urges all stakeholdersto vote to approve these bylaws amendments. All voters must bring identification which showsthey are Venice Stakeholders. For the complete listof acceptable documents, visit the election page athttp://grvnc.org/NewSite/june27.htm Detailed bylaws language will be available at thepolling place.
Attachment 7: posted June 25 GRVNC Executive Committee meeting agenda
Attachment 8: First letter from Greg Nelson to GRVNC Board regarding election delay
http://www.grvnc.com/files/Venice-5-26-04.pdf
Text reads:
May 25, 2004
Dear Grass Roots Venice Neighborhood Council (GRVNC) Board Members:
The Department of Neighborhood Empowerment encourages you, in the strongest
possible way, to convene a special meeting(s) of the Board and of the
stakeholders within the next 30 days in order to take the following actions:
1. Utilize the process outlined in the GRVNC bylaws (amended in 2002), and
amend the bylaws to allow for a one-time extension of the Board terms for 90
days, and submit a Neighborhood Council Application to Change or Adjust Bylaws
to the Department on only this issue. This request can be approved by me, and
does not require approval by the Board of Neighborhood Commissioners.
2. Postpone the election proposed for June 27, 2004 for 90 days, and suspend
all election activity until the issues surrounding the 2004 election have been
analyzed, a resolution has been reached, and the Department has reviewed the
2004 election procedures to ensure that they comply with your bylaws and other
applicable laws.
3. Seek immediate assistance from the Dispute Resolution Division of the
Office of the City Attorney to bring all of the relevant parties together to
finalize bylaws amendments and election procedures that address the
election-related issues which divide your community.
There are several major issues that make it impossible for our department or
commission to propose alternative solutions at this time.
A. It is currently unclear if the Neighborhood Council Application to Change
or Adjust Bylaws submitted by the Board on April 17, 2004 is valid without
stakeholder ratification as outlined in the GRVNC bylaws in Article X, Section
A.2.
B. It is unclear if the Neighborhood Council Application to Change or Adjust
Bylaws submitted by the GRVNC Board on behalf of the stakeholders (5/24/04) is
valid due to issues raised by the Board about the process by which the petition
was passed.
C. If it occurred on June 27, 2004, the election of the GRVNC would most
likely be challenged on several grounds including, but not limited to, overall
timeline and stakeholder verification, since these activities began without
approved election procedures to support them.
It may never be possible to reach at point where Venice stakeholders find
themselves working together for the betterment of Venice. It remains a dream
for some of us, but we understand that Venice may always find itself in
conflict through the actions of too many people who seem to be driven by the
need to win. In the world of neighborhood councils and participatory democracy,
those who are driven by the need win only ensure that everyone loses. As the
first words of the City Charter explain, our goal is to increase public
participation in government.
Our system of neighborhood councils is unique. It attempts to bring together
people of different values, backgrounds, priorities, personalities, and
socioeconomic status, and have them sit as peers in guiding the future of their
neighborhood. Accomplishing this goal is Venice is especially challenging.
If you don’t believe anything else that we’ve ever told you, believe us when
we tell you that if you proceed with an election amid these chaotic conditions,
the election will produce division, conflict, and confusion from which Venice
may never recover.
We are receiving dozens of e-mail messages a day regarding the election.
Rarely do we read any that argue that people should put aside their personal
agendas and put Venice first. Instead, each argues why their position should
prevail.
The actions of the governing board and the stakeholders have raised many
unique questions that should be answered with the assistance of the Office of
the City Attorney, the legal counsel for the Grass Roots Venice Neighborhood
Council, before proceeding with the election.
We await your response. Please contact Jamiko Bell, Sr. Election
Coordinator, at jbell@mailbox.lacity.org for assistance in planning your next
steps.
With hope,
Greg Nelson
General Manager
Attachment 9: Second letter from Greg Nelson to GRVNC Board regarding election delay
http://www.grvnc.com/?q=node/view/247
Text reads:
June 11, 2004
Dear Grass Roots Venice Neighborhood Council (GRVNC) Board Members:
In response to your June 7th decision to conduct the GRVNC 2004 Election, the
Department of Neighborhood Empowerment reiterates the previous advice to
postpone the election, scheduled for June 27th, for a period of 90 days.
Before the current Board terms expire on June 30, 2004, and the GRVNC loses the
ability to gather a quorum, its ability to conduct business, and possibly its
certification as a Neighborhood Council, the Department suggests that the Board
take only the following steps:
1. Convene special meetings of the Executive Committee and the Board to propose
a single-issue bylaws amendment for a one-time extension of the current Board
terms for 90 days. This can be done prior to June 30th if the Board exercises
is remaining power to:
a. Postpone the Board member election for 90 days from the proposed June 27th
date,
b. On June 27, 2004, seek stakeholder ratification of the previously submitted
Board petition to amend bylaws per Article X, Section A (2) of the current
GRVNC bylaws,
c. Approve a single-issue bylaws amendment for a one-time 90 day extension of
Board terms,
d. Set an election date for stakeholder ratification of the single-issue bylaws
amendment that is “not less than 30 days” from the date of the Board action, in
accordance with the process outlined in your bylaws in Article X, Section A
(2),
e. Empower the Rules and Elections Committee to conduct the stakeholder
election, complete the bylaws application, and turn it into DONE for
processing.
As I mentioned in my previous letter, I can and will approve this request
immediately. Although this process will create a period of Board inactivity as
the bylaws amendments are processed, once approved, the Board will be restored
long enough for the Department to examine all of the issues surrounding the
current election process including, but not limited to, the two (2) bylaws
amendments already submitted to the Department, the election procedures
currently on file with the Department, the legal issues surrounding the Venice
bylaws, and the materials and timeline for the 2004 election.
At this time, the Department cannot support an election of the GRVNC on June
27, 2004, for the following reasons:
A. In the absence of a citywide election policy, admittedly the Department has
no legal authority to force a Neighborhood Council to postpone an election,
however DONE does have the right to withhold financial support and its
“sanction” to an election that we feel is not in the best interest of the
stakeholders. By “approving” election procedures, the Department announces to
stakeholders that we are reasonably certain that the election will be conducted
fairly and in accordance with the laws that govern all Neighborhood Councils,
the bylaws of the Neighborhood Council, and that participation will be open to
all stakeholders. In this situation, the uncertainties surrounding the
election, and the fact that the timelines for outreach, candidate notification,
stakeholder registration and notification, etc, have passed, we cannot make
that claim.
B. Although the Department is primarily an advisor to Neighborhood Councils,
our advice comes from our experience of working with over 100 Neighborhood
Councils at various stages in their development. In most cases, we can predict
the logical outcome of Neighborhood Council actions and can advise them
accordingly. However, in some cases, our only prediction is that the proposed actions
of a Neighborhood Council will catapult the group into an abyss of unanswered
questions and uncertain consequences. In the decision to conduct the election,
Venice stands on the precipice of that abyss.
It is very important to note the work of the Election Procedures Working Group.
Comprised predominantly of representatives from Neighborhood Councils, the
Group has nearly finalized its effort to recommend some election processes that
would be required of all Neighborhood Councils when holding elections. At the
core of the recommendations, which has the Group's unanimous approval, is that
in order for elections to be open and fair, election procedures should be
finalized within 90 days of the election. The Group felt, quite understandably,
the openness and fairness of any election would be comprised if candidates and
voters were not provided with a reasonable amount of time to "know the
rules." The GRVNC election is scheduled to be held in 16 days, and the
election procedures have not been finalized.
We hope that you will reconsider your decision to conduct an election on June
27, 2004. If you have any questions, please contact Jamiko Bell, Sr. Election
Coordinator, at jbell@mailbox.lacity.org or ncelections@mailbox.lacity.org.
With hope,
Greg Nelson
General Manager
GN:jb/gn
Thank You,
Jamiko R. Bell
Sr. Project Coordinator
Elections and Policy Development Team
Attachment 10: Resignation of Paul Ryan as GRVNC Election Committee Chair
From: "Paul
Seamus Ryan" <paulryan_grvnc@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu Jun 24, 2004 11:04:55 PM US/Pacific
To: board@grvnc.org,
Cc: jbell@mailbox.lacity.org, jkvas@earthlink.net
Subject: Official Resignation
Hi folks,
Early this afternoon I called the Westminster School to confirm the GRVNC's use
of the school for Sunday's election. I had been told on several
occassions by the former chair of the GRVNC Rules and Elections Committe that
such arrangements had been made. The Vice Principal of the school had no
record of reservation by the GRVNC for Sunday. Further, the Vice
Principal informed me that the school's parking lot is used to generate revenue
for the school on Sundays throughout the summer. Beach goers pay $10 per
car and the school makes approximately $5,000 over the course of a single day.
In a nutshell, as of this moment the GRVNC does not have permission to use the
school facilities or parking lot on Sunday. Consequently, the GRVNC is
presently not in compliance with its Board-approved elections procedures, which
require the election to be held at the Westminster School and for sufficient
automobile parking to be provided.
To use a metaphor, this election has been skating on thin ice for months.
Today, as far as my involvement is concerned, the ice broke. I have a
6:30 a.m. flight to Sacramento tomorrow on a business trip and will not return
to Venice until late tomorrow night. I am not available to broker a last
minute deal with the LA Unified School District tomorrow. This evening,
the GRVNC Executive Committee refused to heed my request that the election be
postponed. Instead, several members of the GRVNC Executive Committee will
attempt to negotiate a deal with the school district tomorrow.
I've tried my best to administer an election under rushed, controversial
circumstances. I refuse to administer Sunday's election given such great
uncertainty at this late hour. I resign as chair of the Rules and
Election Committee.
Best regards,
Paul Seamus Ryan
Attachment 11: Final Election Canvas for June 27 election
Grass Roots Venice Neighborhood Council
Independent Election
Administrator’s
Report on the June 27, 2004,
Elections
of officers and
representatives for the GRVNC board
and of By-Laws Amendments
Report submitted by Casey
Peters
213- 385-2786
Final Official Certified Canvass
Election Preparations
On June 16, Paul Seamus Ryan contacted me by email in his role as Independent Election Administrator (IEA) for the Grass Roots Venice Neighborhood Council (GRVNC), seeking assistance in administering the election.
My name had been suggested to Mr. Ryan by Jim Smith, Treasurer of the GRVNC board, apparently because I was known for efficient and impartial supervision of the first election of a governing board for KPFK 90.7fm, Los Angeles affiliate of the Pacifica Radio Network.
In his initial email, Paul Ryan asked me for the best time to meet with him on June 26 to prepare for the following day’s polling of Venice stakeholders and the subsequent vote count. Another email of June 23 was sent to all who had agreed to help with the election process, seeking additional volunteers. The next day, Ryan sent an email entitled “Official Resignation” in which he stated that the Vice-Principal of Westminster School denied that any reservation had been made to use school facilities for the GRVNC election. Ryan stated: “I am not available to broker a last minute deal with the LA Unified School District tomorrow… I've tried my best to administer an election under rushed, controversial circumstances. I refuse to administer Sunday's election given such great uncertainty at this late hour”. It looked to me like this election would not occur.
I was surprised when Jim Smith telephoned me on Friday, June 25, 2004, during an emergency meeting of the GRVNC executive committee to ask me to step in at the last minute to oversee the conduct of the voting. Despite the resignation of Ryan, the plan to hold the election as publicized was proceeding. The Westminster School had been secured after some administrative difficulties, volunteers were scheduled to help at the polls, and the board did not want to postpone the election for two reasons. One was that after building momentum toward the advertised date and place (with over 10,000 leaflets distributed, I was told), canceling the election at the last minute would make it difficult to regain credibility for holding an election at a later date. Secondly, the terms of many board members were about to expire, and without a quorum the remaining board members would encounter obstacles to calling a legitimate election.
Reluctantly, I agreed to supervise the proceedings on election day, including the vote count. I felt that the hundreds of people who were expected to come to the polls should not be turned away in their attempt to exercise their civic duty. If the controversies that had apparently clouded the pre-election proceedings were
legitimate and substantive, the election results could be set aside. But if allegations of an improper election were not upheld, those who came to the polls on Sunday, June 27, deserved to have their votes counted.
On Saturday, June 26, I met with Sabrina Venskus, newly elected Chair of the Election Committee of the GRVNC board. We discussed various logistical concerns, such as the number of regular and provisional ballots to be printed, polling place layout and signage, the number of volunteers needed and where they would be stationed, providing refreshments for volunteers, and assuring security for casting and counting of the ballots.
What I cannot comment upon with any authority is the nomination process and other preparatory work done prior to my coming on board as Independent Election Administrator (IEA) as of June 25. As someone who was called in at the last minute to oversee the voting and vote-counting process, I had absolutely nothing to do with establishing election procedures, overseeing nominations, or supervising the campaign period, and little to do with logistical preparations for the polling place.
Election Day
From my observation, the conduct of the election on the day of the voting went quite well. Hundreds of Venice residents and other stakeholders exhibiting a wide variety of demographic characteristics participated in a serious yet joyful manner. Some had babies or children with them, some came in wheelchairs or on roller blades, some rode bicycles to the polling place, and some walked their dogs. They streamed in at a fairly constant rate, with a dip during lunch hour and an expected surge during the hour before the polls closed. A rough hour by hour count of voters indicated about 63 during the first hour from 10 to 11 am, 70 from 11 to noon, 55 from noon to 1pm, 84 voters from 1 to 2 pm, 88 from 2 to 3, and 146 in the final hour, for a total of over 500 voters between 10 am and 4 pm on Sunday, June 27, 2004.
Two separate elections were conducted concurrently in the same large room. There were two ballots, with separate ballot boxes for each election. One was the election of officers and representatives for the Grass Roots Venice Neighborhood Council. The second was on ratification of proposed GRVNC By-Laws amendments. Voters received the candidate ballot first, and after casting that (or, in a few cases, disposing of it), went to the next table to turn in a certificate to pick up a By-Laws ballot. A few voters participated in only one or the other election, but almost all voted in both.
The primary complaint I heard at the polling place was that parking was woefully inadequate, since the school lot was not available as in the previous election, and that many potential voters may likely have given up due to lack of parking.
Two observers complained when the chair of the Elections Committee, in response to a voter’s complaint, commented that the LAUSD’s denial of parking for this election at Westminster School, which had been available for a previous GRVNC election, was the result of attempted “sabotage” by a faction that did not want this election to occur. At the request of the observers, I immediately instructed the Elections Committee Chair not to publicly make such characterizations, and she cooperated.
I feel that one flaw in the set-up was the lack of designated areas for observers. The Chair of the Elections Committee may have acted inappropriately at one point by asking observers to leave. I told her that I disagreed with her feeling that these people were "intimidating voters", and then I followed the observers outside to tell them that they were indeed welcome inside the building to observe the voting process. To my knowledge, after the observers re-entered the building, no further attempt was made to discourage their presence. However, the establishment of clearly marked observation areas, with written rules for observers, could have prevented any such misunderstandings.
Two complaints were raised by one observer as to the conduct of candidates at the polling place on election day, though these complaints were not raised until more than a week after the election. One was that the only ballot-listed candidate for Government Relations Officer, Sheila Bernard, was seen talking with voters in the picnic bench area just outside of the polling place but within the fenced area in which electioneering was prohibited. The other was that the winning candidate for President, Suzanne Thompson, was seen entering or exiting the women’s restroom at a time when a voter was using the restroom, presenting an unfair opportunity for electioneering. Neither of these incidents can reasonably be construed as to have had any actual effect on the election results.
The vote count following the closing of the polls went smoothly and efficiently, thanks to numerous dedicated GRVNC volunteers.
Post-Election Review
The day after the election, I sent preliminary election results to any observers who had given me their email addresses and to the Chair of the Elections Committee. On July 1, I emailed the same information to the GRVNC board and candidates from Sunday’s election, and also offered an opportunity for reviewing ballots and stakeholder application forms.
Two candidates took advantage of the opportunity, scheduled for noon to 2 pm on Saturday, July 3, at the Oakwood Recreation Center in the heart of Venice. I actually stayed until 2:45 for the convenience of the candidates.
As the candidates did their research, I arranged the ballots and stakeholder application forms into numerical order. In doing so, I discovered that the volunteers who pre-numbered the forms had inadvertently duplicated three numbers. This resulted in two each of ballots numbered 42, 54, and 515. In addition, the volunteers working the candidate ballot distribution table had failed to enumerate 14 candidate ballots.
Ballot numbers are not sequential because the stakeholder application forms were divided into piles at the voter registration station table and for use on clipboards, and not all of the piles were exhausted. That is why, for instance, no ballots are numbered between 234 and 324, and why the highest numbered ballot is 737 although just over 500 people voted.
Candidate challenge
Richard Myers, candidate for At-Large Representative, has filed a challenge to the validity of numerous ballots, based on allegations of voter ineligibility. He has based his challenges on the following reasons, listing the pertinent Stakeholder Declaration Identification Numbers:
Passport not valid ID: 156, 360
Stakeholder based on work, but drivers license used as id: 231, 572
No signature of volunteer or no id type specified: 63, 225, 344, 371, 390, 391, 393, 402, 403, 458, 503, 589, 590, 594, 737
Should have been provisional: 346
Stakeholder based on PO Box and drivers license: 457
Invalid credential for non-resident stakeholder: 394, 455, 491, 527
Summary of Election Results
The results listed below are essentially the same as the preliminary vote count of June 27, 2004. The only difference is in a corrected count of write-in votes.
I have determined that the inclusion of all provisional ballots is appropriate, given that the final outcomes, not even in District 6, the closest contest, would be altered even if all provisional ballots on the prevailing side were eliminated and all provisional ballots on the losing side were included.
One source of confusion had to do with whether a voter need be a resident or other stakeholder in a particular district in order to vote in that district. It was determined that the rules did not say so, allowing each voter the ability to select in which of Venice’s 7 geographical districts they chose to vote. This was partly based on the fact that under the city charter of Los Angeles, stakeholders need not reside in a neighborhood to vote for any number of Neighborhood Councils. Regardless, throughout election day, voters were regularly referred to the map of Venice to determine which was their own district.
Leading up to these conduct of this election, there were apparently any number of obstacles and controversies. Of these, I know little and have no basis to offer cogent commentary. I do know that there was some question of actually delaying the election, along with the possibility of a re-vote 90 days after the June election. The City of Los Angeles recommended postponing the election, the League of Women Voters declined to administer this election, and then Paul Ryan resigned as administrator just three days before the vote. However, articles in the Venice Paper and the Argonaut publicized the expectation that the election would go
My feeling is that, while there may or may not be grounds for challenging this election on the basis of the nomination process or the campaign activities (of which I know too little to judge), the actual conduct of the polling and vote-counting provides no basis for a serious challenge of the election.
Therefore, as Independent Election Administrator for the Grass Roots Venice Neighborhood Council, I hereby certify the following to be the final results of the June 27, 2004 election.
Suzanne Thompson is elected President.
Alice Stek is elected Vice President.
DeDe McCrary is elected Second Vice President.
Sheila Bernard is elected Government Relations Officer.
John Davis is elected Secretary.
Francisco Letelier is elected At-large Representative.
Deborah Krall is elected Geographic Representative District 1.
Bonnie Cheeseman is elected Geographic Representative District 2.
Bridget Graham is elected Geographic Representative District 3.
Dennis Hathaway is elected Geographic Representative District 4.
Emily Winters is elected Geographic Representative District 5.
Michael McGuffin is elected Geographic Representative District 6.
Zoe Garaway is elected Geographic Representative District 7.
All six By-Laws amendments are deemed to have been ratified.
Casey
Peters
Grass Roots Venice
Neighborhood Council
GRVNC Board Election
and Special Election on
By-Laws amendments
June 27, 2004
Final Official
Certified Canvass
Please note: The intent of the voter is recorded as clearly as could be determined. If no vote is cast for an office, no vote is recorded. If a mark is made by a blank space, the vote is recorded as a write-in for (blank). Provisional ballot write-ins are indicated with a (p).
President
Jennifer Carson: 46 regular votes + 6 provisional votes = 52 total votes
Suzanne Thompson: 357 regular votes + 31 provisional votes = 388 total votes
5 regular write-ins + 1 provisional write-in = 6 total write-ins
Write-ins: anyone else, (blank), Robert LaPorta, Naiome Nighengale (p), not enough info., Brian Weber
Total votes cast for President = 446
Suzanne
Thompson is elected President.
Vice President
Alice Stek: 359 regular votes + 35 provisional votes = 394 total votes
11 regular write-ins + 1 provisional write-in = 12 total write-ins
Write-ins: Nick Antonicello (p), anyone else, (blank), Bryan Cook, Becky Cotton, David Ewing (2 votes), Greg Fitchitt, Shane Harrison, Robert LaPorta, nobody, not enough info.
Total votes cast for Vice President = 405
Alice Stek is elected Vice
President.
2nd
Vice President
DeDe McCrary: 363 regular votes + 33 provisional votes = 396 total votes
9 regular write-ins + 2 provisional write-ins = 11 total write-ins
Write-ins: Nick Antonicello (p), anyone else, (blank), Cashus (p), Scott Cort, Rebel Harrison, Dr. John, Robert LaPorta, nobody, Puppyhead, Laddie Williams
Total votes cast for 2nd Vice President = 404
DeDe
McCrary is elected Second Vice President.
Government Relations Officer
Sheila Bernard: 335 regular votes + 31 provisional votes = 366 total votes
12 regular write-ins + 2 provisional write-ins = 14 regular write-ins
Write-ins: Nick Antonicello (p), anyone else, (2 blank), Bonnie Cheeseman, Bryan Cook, Marta Evry, Freddy & Baby, Jimi Hendrix (p), Robert LaPorta, Barbara Meyers, Dr, John Michel, nobody, Tiffany Wright
Total votes cast for Government Relations Officer = 382
Sheila Bernard is elected
Government Relations Officer.
Secretary
John Davis: 357 regular votes + 31 provisional votes = 388 total votes
11 regular write-ins + 1 provisional write-in = 12 total write-ins
Write-ins: Eden Andes, Nick Antonicello (p), anyone else, Dede Audet, (blank), Bozo The Clown, Bryan Cook, Robert LaPorta, Howard Meyer, nobody, Gina Record, Sara Stebbins
Total votes cast for Secretary = 399
John Davis is elected Secretary.
At-Large Representative
Francisco Letelier: 346 regular votes + 30 provisional votes = 376 total votes
Richard Myers: 25 regular votes + 3 provisional votes = 28 total votes
Larry B. Smoot: 7 regular votes + 3 provisional votes = 10 total votes
6 regular write-in votes + 2 provisional write-in votes = 8 total write-ins
Write-ins: Nick Antonicello (p), anyone else, (blank), Robert LaPorta, Jim Morrison (p), nobody, Jeanne Pevelle, Lisa Zwerling
Total votes cast for At-Large Representative = 419
Francisco Letelier is elected
At-large Representative.
Geographic Representative District 1
Deborah Krall: 90 regular votes = 3 provisional votes = 93 total votes
Rick Selan : 2 regular votes + 0 provisional votes = 2 total votes
0 write-in votes recorded
Total votes cast for Geographic Representative District 1 = 95
Deborah Krall is elected
Geographic Representative District 1.
Geographic Representative District 2
Bonnie Cheeseman: 25 regular votes + 4 provisional votes = 29 total votes
7 regular write-ins + 0 provisional write-ins = 7 total write-ins
Write-ins: Rudolph Axelford, Theodore Hajfar, Ibraham (p), Robert LaPorta, “dr.” John R. Michel
Total votes cast for Geographic Representative District 2 = 36
Bonnie Cheeseman is elected
Geographic Representative District 2.
Geographic Representative District 3
Bridget Graham: 63 regular votes + 12 provisional votes = 75 total votes
2 regular write-in votes + 1 provisional write-in vote = 3 total write-ins
Write-ins: Joshua Foster (p), Greg Matthew,
Total votes cast for Geographic Representative District 3 = 78
Bridget Graham is elected
Geographic Representative District 3.
Geographic Representative District 4
Dennis Hathaway: 30 regular votes + 2 provisional votes = 32 total votes
Will Yeager: 2 regular votes + 2 provisional votes = 4 total votes
3 regular write-in votes + 0 provisional votes = 3 total write-ins
Write-ins: Keith Harrison
Total votes cast for Geographic Representative District 4 = 39
Dennis Hathaway is elected
Geographic Representative District 4.
Geographic Representative District 5
Howard Saxe: 3 regular votes + 0 provisional votes = 3 total votes
Kelly Willis: 8 regular votes + 0 provisional votes = 8 total votes
Emily Winters: 115 regular votes + 9 provisional votes = 124 total votes
1 regular write-in vote + 0 provisional write-in votes = 1 total write-in
Write-in: Simon Maltby
Total votes cast for Geographic Representative District 5 = 136
Emily Winters is elected
Geographic Representative District 5.
Geographic Representative District 6
Michael McGuffin: 27 regular votes + 3 provisional votes = 30 total votes
John Raphling: 20 regular votes + 3 provisional votes = 23 total votes
3 regular write-in votes + 0 provisional write-in votes = 3 total write-ins
Write-ins: Barbara Bernben, Yolanda Gonzalez, Dr. John,
Total votes cast for Geographic Representative District 6 = 56
Michael McGuffin is elected
Geographic Representative District 6.
Geographic Representative District 7
Zoe Garaway: 34 regular votes + 2 provisional votes = 36 total votes
2 regular write-in votes + 3 provisional write-in votes = 5 total write-ins
Write-ins: : Nick Antonicello (p), (blank), Joyce Bregman (2 provisional votes), Don’t Know Zoe,
Total votes cast for Geographic Representative District 7 = 41
Zoe Garaway is elected
Geographic Representative District 7.
Total votes cast for all 7 districts Geographic Representative = 481
By-Laws amendment 1
Yes: 317 regular votes + 34 provisional votes = 351 yes votes
No: 100 regular votes + 7 provisional votes = 107 no votes
By-Laws
amendment 1 is ratified.
By-Laws amendment 2
Yes: 371 regular votes + 33 provisional votes = 404 yes votes
No: 38 regular votes + 6 provisional votes = 44 no votes
By-Laws
amendment 2 is ratified.
By-Laws amendment 3
Yes: 299 regular votes + 34 provisional votes = 333 yes votes
No: 115 regular votes + 7 provisional votes = 122 no votes
By-Laws
amendment 3 is ratified.
By-Laws amendment 4
Yes: 399 regular votes + 38 provisional votes = 437 yes votes
No: 20 regular votes + 1 provisional vote = 21 no votes
By-Laws amendment 4 is ratified.
By-Laws amendment 5
Yes: 404 regular votes + 36 provisional votes = 440 yes votes
No: 23 regular votes + 3 provisional votes = 26 no votes
By-Laws amendment 5 is ratified.
By-Laws amendment 6
Yes: 386 regular votes + 35 provisional votes = 421 yes votes
No: 36 regular votes + 4 provisional votes = 40 no votes
By-Laws
amendment 6 is ratified.