|
2002:
May /
June /
July
August /
September /
October
November /
December
2003: January /
February /
March
April /
May /
June /
July
August /
September /
October
November /
December
2004: January /
February /
March
April /
May /
June /
July
August /
September /
October
November /
December
2005: January /
February /
March
April /
May /
June /
July
August /
September /
October
November /
December
2006: January /
February /
March
April /
May /
June /
July
August /
September /
October
November /
December
2007: January /
February /
March
April /
May /
June /
July
August /
September /
October
November /
December
2008: January /
February /
March
April /
May
Current
entries
Wednesday,
November 22, 2006, 4:27 pm
Bob Guenzel's letter to the Ann Arbor News. Today, County
Administrator Bob Guenzel wrote as follows to the Ann Arbor News, copied
to other county officials:
From: Bob Guenzel
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 2:41 PM
Subject: Concerns about the News' reporting
November 22, 2006
Mr. Pepple,
I am writing to you today to make you aware of a very real perception -
mine as well as others' - that the people of Ann Arbor and surrounding
communities are not being well served by the Ann Arbor News in your
coverage of public safety and justice, namely the need for expansion of
the Washtenaw County Jail.
I personally have been disappointed by the newspaper's lack of coverage
on what I consider to be the now critical issue of jail overcrowding, and
the Sheriff's handling of the same. The jail has been chronically
overcrowded for more than two years, experiencing "official" overcrowdings
dozens of times, leading to the early release of inmates. The current
"lockdown" is the second declared by the Sheriff in the last three months.
The status prohibits new arrestees from being booked into the jail,
creating a dangerous situation not only for the community, but for jail
staff and the inmates themselves.
In spite of this serious situation, the Sheriff refuses to act pursuant
to Section 7 of the Jail Overcrowding Statute, which mandates that the
Sheriff shall reduce all sentences by up to 30% in order to alleviate
overcrowding. Three inmates are now suing the Sheriff because of the
situation. Numerous members of the law enforcement community, the
judiciary, and the Board of Commissioners have expressed to me their
frustration at the Sheriff's refusal to act, some considering it a serious
abrogation of official duty. These facts have been discussed at numerous
public meetings, yet the Ann Arbor News has only given passing reference
to the topic.
Instead, the News found it useful to report the Sheriff's assertion
that I attempted to "stack" the Criminal Justice Collaborative Council
(CJCC) with the appointment of former Commissioner Robert Brackenbury.
Your reporters accepted this assertion as fact despite never having
attended one of these regular public CJCC meetings, checking the web site
for the roster of members, or speaking to any of the other CJCC members
regarding their opinion of the matter.
In fact, if anyone had approached the Chair of the CJCC, the honorable
Archie Brown, I am sure he gladly would have provided you with the letter
he recently sent the Sheriff in which he expresses (on behalf of the
entire CJCC) disappointment in the Sheriff's persistent refusal to
participate in the Council. Your reporters have relied on information
provided by a person who does not even attend the forum on which he
presumes to comment.
I suppose what has moved me finally to write to you today was the lead
in the recent story regarding the jail bond issuance. Your reporters
relied on information provided by the Sheriff in stating that the jail
bond issuance included funding for a new District Court which, of course,
it does not. When I complained about this error, the News responded with
a two-sentence correction buried in Saturday's paper.
Seriously concerned as I am about misstatements such as these (the
"stacking" of the CJCC, the inclusion of funding for a new District Court
in the jail bond issuance, and other instances that I could reference upon
request), I am more bothered by what continues to be unstated by the
News.
The implication of silence on important issues such as the Sheriff's
refusal to carry out his duty, the ramifications of impediments to
expansion of the Jail, as well as other vital aspects to these stories, is
alarming. Without all the information, without an opportunity to get all
the facts, our community will continue to face competing agendas that do
not serve the common good.
My fear is that people who do not have the facts, but who have great
concerns over public safety and justice, will seize on this informational
vacuum to launch yet another campaign to prevent the expansion of the
jail, which has been and continues to be an urgent priority for this
community. Missing information or disinformation undermines the hard work
of very dedicated individuals.
If you need access to more information on most of these topics, I would
urge you to contact any one of the diverse 17 members of the CJCC (cjcc.ewashtenaw.org) which
includes the judiciary, the Prosecuting Attorney, the Public Defender,
private attorneys, elected officials, and others.
As always, my door is open to you and your staff. If there's something
more I can do to be more welcoming or accessible, or to ensure that you
are receiving all the information that you need, please do not hesitate to
let me know.
I sincerely look forward to working with your reporters.
Bob Guenzel
....Posted by Lawrence Kestenbaum —
Tuesday,
November 21, 2006, 6:31 pm
Yesterday's message to my staff.
We have all been telling each other what a short week this is, with
Thursday and Friday off. Thanksgiving is not just a time for seeing
family and giving thanks: it is also the last day of autumn as culturally
defined, and the kickoff of the holiday season, followed all too soon by
Hanukah, Christmas, Kwanzaa, and New Year's.
Our office, like most offices, isn't open the day after Thanksgiving,
but all the retail stores will be. When I worked at the Lord & Taylor
department store in Briarwood Mall, we were made to understand that this
was the biggest sales day of the year. In other words, it was all hands
on deck. Nobody in the store could have that day off, from the management
office to the sales floor to the loading dock. And it was a very long
day, too.
So when you do your shopping this Friday, spare a thought for all the
hard working folks who are ringing up your purchases, stocking those
shelves, and vacuuming the aisles. Sooner or later, each of them will
come to see us, whether to pick up a birth certificate or to serve on a
jury, and the roles will be reversed: they will be the customer, and we
will be at their service. Courtesy and respect smooths the process, no
matter which side of the counter we are on.
Individual meetings with nonsupervisory staff continue. I'm hearing
feedback that it's easier to respond if you're named out in the open, so
here's who I'd like to see in the next week or two: [names redacted].
Please arrange a half-hour with your supervisor and my schedule (via
Outlook) for a meeting in my office.
Let's have a great week and a Happy Thanksgiving!
....Posted by Lawrence Kestenbaum —
Saturday,
November 18, 2006, 12:57 pm
Belated press clippings. Last Sunday, November 12, the Ann
Arbor News printed a Q
& A about the election:
Insider's view of Election Day
Sunday, November 12, 2006
BY DAVE GERSHMAN
News Staff Reporter
As the supervisor of elections in Washtenaw County, Lawrence Kestenbaum
discusses how the midterm elections went and why voter turnout here may be
even higher than you think.
Q: Procedurally, how did the election go?
A: We had a very smooth election, I'd say. We had some scattered
problems in particular areas. We had some tabulators which had to be
replaced because they broke down, particularly in one jurisdiction where
the tabulators were a little bit older than the tabulators in the rest of
the county. But we got those replaced in the morning and, on the whole,
things went very smoothly.
Q: Any specific problems at the polls?
A: There were some complaints, really scattered complaints, about
voters being challenged on grounds that seemed spurious, but I don't think
there was a systematic problem. I think there were some scattered places
where there were issues. Very few of them even came to us. They didn't
really blow up to the point that they thought to involve the county clerk
as opposed to the local clerk.
Q: What was the voter turnout in the county?
A: Countywide we had just over 135,000 voters, which is a significant
increase over four years ago, the last comparable election, when we had
just over 108,000 voters. It was a smaller increase in the percent
turnout, from about 47 to about 54 percent of the total registered
voters.
Q: What do you attribute to the increase in the turnout?
A: I think that this was an election which had nationally a relative
high turnout. There were some areas I heard about - not around here -
where the turnout was actually higher than the 2004 presidential election,
which would be amazing, given that the 2004 presidential election had a
very high turnout.
We had a smaller increase here over (the last midterm election in) 2002
partly because we had less of a ceiling here. Washtenaw County has a
higher turnout to begin with, and so there's not much room for a further
increase.
And also because I think that unlike a lot of other areas, we didn't
have a lot of contested local races on the ballot. Most of the interest in
Washtenaw County was directed at the state and national level - governor,
U.S. senator, and the ballot proposals, especially Proposal 2.
Q: Can you talk about the specific demographics of the county and
how that might affect turnout?
A: Washtenaw County is the 10th most highly educated county in the
United States out of 3,000 counties, and so it has a highly educated
electorate which has a tendency to turn out. Educational attainment is the
No. 1 highest correlate for voting. ... We have a lot of people here with
post-graduate degrees, and certainly with bachelor's degrees ... so the
turnout here is high and the turnout here doesn't vary as much from year
to year as in other counties.
We also have a relatively transient population. There's a tremendous
flow of people, students, and faculty and other folks who come here and
leave - who move out of the area, move out of state - which creates issues
with maintaining voter records for them. ... If someone leaves the state,
chances are their voter registration is going to remain, even if the
person thinks that they've canceled their Michigan voter registration.
(And if) they've moved to New Jersey or Ohio somewhere, the other states
usually don't bother to send back notice that the person has
re-established themselves in another place and so the number of registered
voters here is somewhat inflated. ...
I think that depending on how high of an estimate you make of the
deadwood on the voter rolls, it could be more like, I'm guessing, more on
the order of a 75 percent voter turnout (in Washtenaw County).
Q: There's no easy way to get those old names off the voting
rolls?
A: No. Between state law and federal law and just the practicalities of
trying to enlist the cooperation of other states, it is really quite
cumbersome. I know that the state of Michigan has come under some
criticism and some pressures from the Justice Department over just the
sheer number of registered voters we have statewide. The number of
registered voters is threatening to overtake the size of the eligible
voter population. That is implying that we have tremendously more names on
the rolls than we have people who are eligible to vote because of
deadwood, because of registrations that have basically become outdated or
spurious for one reason or another. The federal government's position is
that having people on the rolls who are guaranteed not to vote is an
invitation to, potentially, fraud.
Q: What's the trend you're seeing in terms of absentee
ballots?
A: Absentee ballots are being used more widely over time and you can
see the percentage creeping up little by little year by year. That may
also have to do with the aging population as well. If you're 60 years of
age or older you're automatically eligible to use an absentee ballot
without having to state another reason.
And people certainly are aware of the fact that if you choose to vote
absentee you can put down that, yes, you plan to be out of the
jurisdiction on Election Day even if those plans later change. There has
been a movement in the Legislature to enact basically freedom to use an
absentee ballot instead of showing up in person without having to state a
reason. That legislation, although supported by virtually all of the
county and municipal clerks in the state and supported by the secretary of
state, did not move forward in the Legislature in the last couple of
years. It may in the next one.
Q: And you support that?
A: Oh, absolutely. ... If people want to vote absentee they should be
able to vote absentee, and the notion of swearing to a reason is really
pretty superfluous.
Q: How are absentee ballots processed?
A: Absentee ballots in almost all of Washtenaw County and probably now
in most states are processed in the same precinct where you would normally
vote if you were voting in person. They're delivered to the precinct,
they're opened in the precinct, and the ballots are handled and processed
in the precinct in the same way as other ballots. It's probably slightly
more paperwork for the election workers. On the other hand, the people who
vote in person need to be handled right away and the absentee ballots can
be handled during slack periods. If it's an extremely busy day, that means
that at the end of the day, the polls close and there's still absentee
ballots to be handled and that may delay the results.
Also in the Sunday Ann Arbor News, a wrap-up article about the election
results (not online), titled "Granholm's popularity only went so far
Tuesday," pointed to the small number of counties to vote against
Proposal 2, the anti-affirmative-action initiative, and quoted me as
follows:
"Ingham and Washtenaw counties are the two most liberal counties in the
state, so it's not unusual to se ethem go one way and everyone else the
other way," said Washtenaw County Clerk Larry Kestenbaum, a former county
commissioner in both constituencies.
"But it's hard to say, even imponderable to determine who and what
issues Granholm brought along through the polls."
Kestenbaum said voters analyze candidates and proposals in different
ways.
"People do pay attention to what newspapers and political leaders do
say concerning candidates, but when it comes to rpoposals, people look at
the paper ballot and the ballot language, and interpret what it means for
them. That showed in the case of Proposal 2," Kestenbaum said.
....Posted by Lawrence Kestenbaum —
Monday,
November 6, 2006, 8:00 pm
Yesterday (Sunday, November 5), the Ann Arbor News published
my op-ed piece about election security:
Vote with confidence
State's optical scan system provides paper-trail backup
BY LAWRENCE KESTENBAUM
With congressional elections coming up, we've all heard a lot about the
possibility of voting problems, glitches or even fraud. Many local
residents have been concerned enough to contact me and ask about Washtenaw
County's election procedures.
The good news is that every Michigan jurisdiction uses the optical scan
paper ballot, similar to the forms used in standardized school tests.
Candidate names and issues are printed directly on the ballot. This is the
ideal "voter-verified paper trail": clear, trustworthy and fully
recountable by hand. This is better than punch cards, better than
old-style paper ballots and enormously better than unrecountable methods
such as mechanical voting machines or touch-screen computers with internal
counters.
Concerns have been raised over the optical scan ballot tabulating
equipment, which some argue is open to manipulation, either by the vendor
or by partisan computer hackers. I do wish the tabulators had been
engineered with security in mind, and I would have preferred open-source
rather than proprietary software on these machines. But there are
safeguards against fraud.
First of all, every precinct has its own tabulator. These tabulators
are each put through a public accuracy test before the election, and are
under the direct supervision of a bipartisan team of election workers
throughout the voting day.
When the polls close, the results in each precinct are printed out and
posted or announced right in the polling place, where they are collected
by campaign and media representatives. Those organizations maintain their
own set of totals as a check on the official ones - an important security
precaution.
A hypothetical conspiracy to steal a big election, without getting
caught, would have to break into and modify hundreds of individual
precinct tabulators. Such a task would require a whole lot of complicit
technicians. The more people involved, the greater the chance that the
secret would get out.
Decentralization of the counting process, which goes on simultaneously
in every precinct, makes it inherently more difficult to steal an
election, because the number of votes the thieves would need to change the
outcome isn't available until the precinct results are reported. Polling
is much too crude to tell this number in advance.
The vendors who provide the tabulators have not escaped suspicion,
particularly Diebold, whose CEO was infamously quoted as "committed to
helping'' Republicans win Ohio in 2004. Washtenaw County has used Diebold
Accuvote tabulators for years.
But the sharpest concerns are with Diebold's no-ballot touch-screen
voting machines, which are not used in Michigan. Moreover, if Diebold were
caught fiddling with election results, that would be the end of the
company, the end of the careers of its executives and the end of billions
of dollars in shareholder value. By itself, that doesn't prove Diebold is
trustworthy, but it sets up some powerful incentives against cheating.
Finally, if there is any doubt about what transpired during a Michigan
election, the ballots themselves are fundamental and available to be
counted. Any losing candidate can file for a recount; any citizen can file
for a recount on a proposal. The fee is $10 per precinct, one of the
lowest rates in the nation. Recounts are done by hand. And the results as
certified in past recounts have been extremely close to the tabulator
counts.
Ideally, there should be hand-count audits routinely after every
election. In the absence of enabling legislation, recounts can serve this
function.
With the 2002 Help America Vote Act, election consolidation, new
equipment and new scrutiny, there have been a lot of changes in the
conduct of elections in recent years. Washtenaw County has come through
these changes ahead of the curve. We upgraded training for election
workers and reached out to recruit more of them. In August, we did a pilot
hand-count audit in five precincts. We have AutoMark machines in each
polling place to help disabled voters mark their ballots. We have put up a
Web site - WashtenawVotes.org - with sample ballots, so that voters will
know what choices they have. And we have improved election night reporting
of results.
When you vote in Washtenaw County, you can be confident that your vote
will be correctly counted.
....Posted by Lawrence Kestenbaum —
2002:
May /
June /
July
August /
September /
October
November /
December
2003: January /
February /
March
April /
May /
June /
July
August /
September /
October
November /
December
2004: January /
February /
March
April /
May /
June /
July
August /
September /
October
November /
December
2005: January /
February /
March
April /
May /
June /
July
August /
September /
October
November /
December
2006: January /
February /
March
April /
May /
June /
July
August /
September /
October
November /
December
2007: January /
February /
March
April /
May /
June /
July
August /
September /
October
November /
December
2008: January /
February /
March
April /
May
Current
entries
|