I was in Waukesha each and every day of the recount from 8 a.m. until Midnight from the first day through Friday, December 9, 2016. I was a primary observer each day. Waukesha County was 1) secretive 2) extremely reluctant to disseminate information 3) extremely disorganized 4) very partisan to the Republican Party 5) treated primary observers with inequity 6) had many tabulators who were extremely partial particularly against 3rd party candidate observers 7) and their Board of Canvassers were not consistent in their inspection and discussions as well determination of which votes counted or didn't count with each team (6 different variations of teams) contradicting the other. They also did not follow state statutes several times. All of this I objected to. I personnally observed every questioned or reviewed ballot. A public records request should be filed. It is my opinion they would not pass a Wisconsin Audit of this election. Also, the Green Party observed election material removed from the secure area and taken into the main office. I have the following documents: 1) All of the Recount Report Sheets for each and every ward ward of Waukesha County. 2) The summary sheet for Waukesha County with vote totals for Trump and Clinton with + and - tallies. 3) A journal notebook of anecdotal notes of each day of the recount. 4) A list of all of the volunteers I procured to work shifts.
Pete (Milw. attorney) and I observed the final reporting to the Board of Canvas from the clerk's office. Pete made a request for the programming information for the computer that programs the voting machines and the corporate attorney has my number to get back to me with that inform.
A canvass official stated in-session to others during a lull, "In Jefferson County they didn't open the originals to compare them. I didn't see them do it." Another higher up canvass official also on record stated that, "Tabulators were 'fresher' during the recount than the night of the election...which is why" they found more of the write-ins [esp McMullin for ex] during the recount process. Also: my apologies, I used the forms I had downloaded as best I could, then used forms provided by a lead/point person Green observer, Greg later. I collected as much info as I could as accurately as possible. Around 5pm, the canvassers were going very quickly and not speaking loud enough (even from 3-4 ft away), but they may have been getting to wards where there were no changes/challenged ballots at that time? It appeared to be the case...
1)Bd of Canvassers voted to move bd table to a different room from where tabulations were being done.rn2)I observed the opening of ballot bags #s 11351,11354,11353,11352,11355 from City of Pewaukee Wards 1,2,3,4rn3)I observed the closing out of ballots from City of New Berlin Ward#2 - everything was accounted for and no objections.rn4)I also observed the closing out of City of Waukesha Ward #22 - the envelope with questionable / damaged ballots was opened by the B/C and after inspection it was agreed that the "voter intent could NOT be determined".I apologize for not being able to report more but it was very difficult to hear and follow what was being said - I hope the Primary Observer who was allowed to stand closer was able to get more info. I do not have any photos/documents to upload.
The process was moving very slow. Spent most the time observing the process.
Things were going extremely slow.I did call the Madison office to report that it was going very slow on 12/2/16.
[x] entered to zen desk Lisbon 1) Remakes out of 260 old 250 Ran out of ballots. 2) Did not have proper signature. 3) Did not want to open bags
Some irregularities noted: Hartland District 14 - 52 absentee ballots were missing. Pollworker commented "I guess they're in here somewhere" Issue was going to be brought up to the canvassing board.Fast vote tabulator machine from ESS which was brought in from another state was experiencing problems. While it counted ballots quickly, the time to print out a report for each batch was becoming progressively slower. The tech who was operating it (Damian) reported this to Waukesha County Election Captain and recommended trying to reboot it. This issue was then taken to the canvassing board. A discussion ensued and the decision was made by the Waukesha County Canvasser to reboot it. Before this could be done, however, a tech from the company operating the machine (Kyle from Milwaukee) advised that rebooting would not correct this as the reports were expected to take longer, as ballot totals increased. When I finished my shift, machine operator and county staff had gone to lunch and I am unsure of what, if anything, was done about this situation.My greatest concern of the day was in the seemingly arbitrary way that decisions were being made about which ballots were being accepted. Case in point:: A person counting votes asked a captain if he should count an absentee ballot that did not contain a signature. He was told that a decision was made by the Waukesha County Board the previous day (well into the recount week) to accept absentee ballots without signature. It is my understanding that these were not accepted during the election night counts. I asked if all counties were accepting these and was told that the decision was made on a county-by-county basis. This county-by- county basis seemed odd to me. If Waukesha County (the "reddest" county in the country) was accepting these ballots but Milwaukee or Dane Counties (blue) were not, this could make a signifcant difference in the vote totals. Similarly, the decision was made by canvassers to accept votes for president on write-in ballots on which there was no vice president selected or on which the presidential and vice presidential candidates did not match. I took my concerns to the Green Party leader who passed them on to the the attorney representing the Green Party. I also called the "Boiler Room" in Madison and relayed this information.There were many additional discrepancies with ballots - some that contained one or no initials, one in which the same number appeared on two ballots, absentee ballots that were previously accepted but were now being disqualified due to lack of zip code for address of witness, lack of street number, lack of signature of witness.Most recount workers were polite and answered questions when asked. A few were somewhat hostile and did not answer questions. One pair of women counting ballots conversed non-stop and turned over the ballots they had counted but forgot to write the total on the report and had to request the ballots and report back.I may return to observe again tomorrow if I am able to clear my work schedule.
Are all wards with over votes being reported?ie Does the recount reporting system report each ward that has over-votes?I observed one ward in Waukesha County with 127 over-votes.I read one report on FB for one upstate ward with 85.The question is, is it worth over-vote in just 200 wards? I say yes, see below.I'm worried by the math associated with over-votes.And there are many wards with over-votes.When over-votes are detected, a random "draw down" takes place.Thus if a ward was stuffed with 100 ballots, at random 100 ballots will be drawn and discarded before votes are counted.Thus = If a ward had 1,400 ballots and only 1,300 certified voters, 100 ballots will be discarded.Math - A ward vote assumed to be 50%/50% = 700/700.BUT, should have been candidate 'C' 700 / candidate 'D' 600;"Random "draw down" would discard 50 votes for candidate 'C' and 50 for candidate 'D'. (again assuming 50%/50%)Leaving 'C' with 650 and 'D' with 650, RATHER than 700 for 'C' & 600 for 'D'.Remember 'C' should have had 700 and 'D' only 600 but now it's 650/650 after the result of the prescribed "draw-down"..Possible end result in just 200 wards = 'C' loses 10,000 votes AND 'D' gains 10,000.A 20,000 VOTE SING.Thus a 20,000 vote swing is easy by not being vigilant.
This is an addendum to an entry on Carol's behalf on 12/8.Photos.