* *** 2015_COMMENTS_ON_UNDATED_PRECINCT_OFFICIAL_MANUAL TXT - 2 Aug 2015 14:30:25 - JKNAUTH I had submitted comments on other documents in a 6/10/15 e-mail and had also mailed marked-up hardcopies. I got an acknowledgement that the 6/10/15 e-mail was received, but not that the hardcopies and a 6/11/15 e-mail (on the second wave of documents) were received. I hope they all got there OK. Since my last reviews have there been any changes to Quick Guides, the Provisional Envelope, the ATV, etc. that go along with this manual? Below are my comments on the Precinct Official Manual pdf file you sent. When I get the hardcopy I will complete the review and may have more comments. It is much easier for me to compare the old and new manuals (e.g., to see if something was lost) when I have two hardcopies to compare. The flowcharts (or pieces of them) now appear in multiple documents and even get repeated in the same document. Be careful to keep them the same. For example, in this manual they differ slightly -- the missing "of" noted in the page 62 comment below is not missing in the same block on pages 67 and 68. Could other, more significant differences creep in? My advice is to avoid repeating information. Put it in one place and focus on keeping it correct there. The Quick Guide flowcharts are the most important since those are what the officials are most likely to use during the election. Cover No revision date! My most frequent comment. Cover Minor inconsistency: The phone number on the cover is in the xxx-xxx-xxxx format. All other phone numbers in the manual are in the (xxx) xxx-xxxx format. Actually, the first format is what I use myself (fewer characters to type), but I think the other one is "traditional". Page 26: It's unclear what the "Next to car's front tire" picture is meant to show. It doesn't seem that different from the "Too far away from car" picture. Page 30: "Each Election Official working at the Registration Table is assigned one or more pollbooks." See my 11/9/14 postmortem report, http://jgkhome.name/WakeBOE/Postmortem_2014-11-04.txt, for concerns about dedicating pollbooks to specific people in large elections. I never got any feedback on that. Page 33: In the NCGS 163-166.7(A) quote: "A Election Official" vs. "An Election Official" in two places. Maybe the law drafters in the NC legislature need a "sic" or two. Page 36: I have never seen a Certified Naturalization Document. Does it have a photo (or a residence address, for that matter)? I have seen a birth certificate (my own) and it has neither a photo nor an address, neither of which would be useful for voter ID purposes anyway. Both of these documents are good for the ID documentation, however neither seems to fall in the photo or address categories in the way the text is currently structured. Maybe a third category is needed. Or does all this go away in 2016, so it is not worth the effort? I guess this section has never really been correct in how to list these documents. Page 40: In paragraphs near the bottom of the page: (2)all -> (2) all retreived -> retrieved Page 40: Last paragraph: Is their some procedure for retrieving a one-stop "absentee" ballot as there is for retrieving a mail-in "absentee" ballot? I don't see how a retrieval could be done if someone voted at one-stop and then voted again at the normal polling place before the pink A's got marked. So a little panic may be appropriate (and a subsequent investigation of the offender in either case). Page 42: Am I reading it correctly that only the voter or a near relative can drop an absentee ballot at the BOE office, yet anyone can drop it in a mailbox? Sounds strange. Is this to get the USPS involved so some sort of Federal crime can be declared if things aren't kosher? If the Absentee envelope is sealed and all the appropriate data is written on the outside by the voter, as is supposed to be the case, why can't any person deliver it to the BOE office just as they can put it in any blue mailbox? Shouldn't the third bullet just be changed to read: "Absentee ballots can be mailed on Election Day and must be postmarked on Election Day or they can be dropped off at the Board of Elections office before the close of polls on Election Day." That deletes the (probably incorrect) "near relative" constraint and adds the time constraints to get the first section consistent with the second section on this page. Page 43: Remove the "Who Qualifies as a Near Relative?" box at the bottom of the page. It is redundant with the text right above and is also inaccurate. Legal guardians and representatives of the estate are not near relatives. The text above the box has it right. Page 46: See first page 60 comment below concerning the fourth bullet on page 46. Page 49: First item 3: Rescanning the ATV to replace a spoiled ballot means that ATV must be retrieved. That may not be easy in some cases (ATV already ringed in the white bag, or CJ has a stack of ATVs to audit them , or the observer gets in the way, etc.) On the other hand, if an official cannot see that two ballots are of exactly the same style by looking at the style numbers on the two ballots, they probably should not be working at the Ballot Table. Why require the more complicated rescan procedure? Here is a comment I made on the same section of a draft of the 2014 manual: By implication of the current text, if a voter messes up a ballot and wants a new one, the Ballot Table official must retrieve that voter's ATV so he/she can do a rescan of it and the replacement ballot. I think this is way overkill. From my 5/6/14 postmortem report: "It seems silly to require the voter's ATV to be retrieved for scanning to replace a spoiled ballot with another ballot of exactly the same style. More mistakes and other problems would probably result during that retrieval than just visually making sure the spoiled and replacement ballot styles are identical. Of course if the voter says he was given the wrong ballot style (not just that he made a marking mistake), that's a different matter and results in a much different procedure." Page 53: The following warning really applies to both columns. Is there a way to put this text in a box at the bottom spanning the full page? "Never look at the voter’s ballot to determine how the voter incorrectly marked it." Page 59: Why no heavy box also around the "Last Name" field? Page 60: Third bullet: Ballot Table might also send voter to Help Table because the BT people found that the RT people had not marked the ATV properly (see fourth bullet on page 46). Actually, in our polling place, I (CJ) usually get involved for something like this rather than the HT people so I can talk to the RT person who made the mistake. Or I have the BT official talk to the RT person directly. Page 60: To make the Outcomes list items more parallel: "Send back to Registration Table" "Send to voter's correct precinct" "Send to Ballot Table" Page 60: "Stay at Help Table and vote a provisional ballot: voter is not eligible to vote in your precinct." -> "Stay at Help Table and vote a provisional ballot: voter is not eligible to vote in your precinct by the normal process." Page 62: Last block, second column, item 1: "ballot style the voter's address" -> "ballot style of the voter's address" Page 70: First block is wrong. Should add something like "and, if so, did the voter come from the Registration Table" Here was my 6/11/15 comment: "First oval: This is no longer worded correctly. The HT person doesn't just need to know that the voter has no ATV (someone could have just walked in the door and gone to the HT to skip those long RT lines). Instead the HT person needs to know that the voter went to the RT first and was there directed to go to the HT, probably because the voter's name could not be found in the pollbooks." Page 79: Since last year there seems to have been a change made to whether media can come inside the voting enclosure to make a panoramic photograph. I want to make sure this change was intentional. I do agree with the change. The current draft says the media "may briefly come inside the enclosure" whereas last year's manual said they "may stand just outside the entrance". The change is significant. When I was CJ at the 01-43 polling place, a very large gymnasium, for many years the same TV crew would show up. For their shot we would let them stand inside the enclosure at the back wall of the gym, 50 to 100 feet from the M100 and voting booths. It was allowed by the BOE and there was never any problem. Then about five years ago, the BOE documents changed and said the TV people had to stay outside, even though inside was no problem and outside meant that their camera setup would block the one entrance to the polling place. I objected and gave details to the BOE. In reply I was told in no uncertain terms that the TV people HAD to stand outside. So I would like to be sure this latest change is intentional. As usual for something like this, I think a CJ should be able to figure out if there is a problem and handle things as appropriate for his/her polling place, understanding that voter privacy must be maintained. Note that for my current precinct, 19-09, the polling place is also a gymnasium, but the configuration is considerably different (M100 right by the door), so letting TV people inside would probably not be appropriate. Fortunately, the TV people seem much less interested in 19-09 than in 01-43 and we haven't seen any in the two years I have been CJ at 19-09. All this may be moot for the 19-09 polling place, the Rolesville Elementary School Gymnasium, which is going to be demolished (soon?) according to recent newspaper articles. So far I haven't gotten any status update on this from the BOE. Page ?: I had previously suggested to Gary that a copy of the Oath be included in this manual, as it used to be. That would give people a chance to read it carefully before the setup meeting and think about it (assuming they do actually read the manual). As it is now, as Chief Judge I just read the oath aloud to everyone at Monday setup -- as fast as possible to get us out of there, no fancy oratory or explanations, undoubtedly not too meaningful. It would be better if people had read it beforehand to be clearer what they were now swearing to. Note the current manual has lots of blank pages. One of those could be used for this. Jeff Knauth