Request to Ohio SOS For Response About Project Everest, December 12, 2007
The Ohio Election Justice Campaign
December 12, 2007
Dear Kellye Pinkleton,
We appreciate getting a response that you have received our recent request to learn of the official policies, procedures, and the timeline for how the office of the Ohio Secretary of State will be handling the results of Project EVEREST, and the report. We hope that the full report will be available, and if it is redacted in any way, it will be minimal. We additionally hope that we will be able to view it... literally with the black marks across the sections that the SOS office deems the public will not be able to view. This will allow us to see how much has been removed from public oversight.
It is our democracy, the elections are all about the opinions of the citizens being heard and recorded... and how this is recorded is of great interest to the members of The Ohio Election Justice Campaign, and the general public.
We look forward to hearing from you in regards to your office reviewing the sample product liability lawsuits and other information we provided to you on November 30, 2007, the final day of the testing of our voting machines. If you need to speak with the authors of those lawsuits, Attorney Paul Lehto, or Patricia Axelrod with any questions, I am certain they would make time to speak with staff of your office. We all want to help you. If the machines do not work, we strongly feel there should be a recall and a refund. If it were toys with lead paint from China... there would (and has been) be a recall and a refund. A defective product, is simply a defective product for which the manufacturer should bare the financial responsibility to the customer. The fact that they changed the name of the Diebold company, doesn't speak well of the product.
As Secretary Brunner is recommending that Cuyahoga County discontinue use of its Diebold DRE AccuVote-TSX, we wonder about the other 46 Ohio Counties that use those same machines? Then in Scioto County they have the Diebold AccuVote OS and the Diebold AccuVote-TSX. So that gives Ohio 48 Counties with Diebold machines... we are concerned about this, and so much more.
We look forward to promptly receiving a response to our questions and requests for documents.
Director, The Ohio Election Justice Campaign
----- Original Message -----
From: Pinkleton, Kellye
To: Paddy Shaffer
Cc: Gilbert, Bobbie ; Nance, Christopher ; Klein, David ; Green, Brian
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 11:35 AM
Subject: RE: OEJC - Project Everest Timeline, Policies and Procedures
Dear Ms. Shaffer:
Our office has received your correspondence sent by email (below) and USPS. Thank you for your letter.
Regarding the packet you refer to that was delivered to the office November 30th, we will review the materials and let you know if we have any questions. Thank you in advance for providing that information.
Please note, for your public records requests, Brian Green will be corresponding with you to address the requests.
Again, thank you.
Director, Voting Rights Institute
Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner
180 East Broad Street, 15th Floor
Columbus, Ohio 43215
614.995.1619 Executive Assistant
From: Paddy Shaffer [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2007 11:46 PM
To: Secretary Brunner; Gilbert, Bobbie; Nance, Christopher; Pinkleton, Kellye; Klein, David; Green, Brian
Cc: Mark Niquette; Mark Kovac; Craig, Jon; Ian Urbina; Mary Ann Gould; Paddy Shaffer
Subject: OEJC - Project Everest Timeline, Policies and Procedures
Ohio Election Justice Campaign
Jennifer Brunner, Ohio Secretary of State
Bobbie Gilbert, Executive Assistant to Jennifer Brunner
Christopher Nance, Assistant Secretary of State
Kellye Pinkleton, Director, Voting Rights Institute
David J. Klein, Elections Research and Operations Specialist
Brian Green, Elections Council
Friday, December 7, 2007
Sent via email and US Post
Re: Request for Project Everest report and recommendations parties, process, and timeline
Dear Ms. Brunner, Ms. Gilbert, Mr. Nance, Ms. Pinkleton, Mr. Klein, and Mr. Green:
We are writing to request the document or documents that provide information on the parties, process, and timeline for review of and/or deliberation on the Project Everest report and recommendations.
1. The names, titles, and, if possible, contact information of all legislators, committees, or deliberative bodies, including liaisons, assistants, consultants, or ad hoc committees, that will receive a copy of the report and recommendations.
2. The names, titles, and, if possible, contact information of all executive personnel, including the gubernatorial liaisons, assistants, or consultants, as well as election officials at the county and statewide level and their consultants or deliberative bodies, whether public or private, that will receive a copy of the report and recommendations.
3. A description of the deliberative process involved in reviewing the report and recommendations, whether in writing or orally, including whether such process will be open for public observation and/or comment and where and when such opportunity for public observation and/or comment will be.
4. The timeline for review and/or deliberation on the report and recommendations, including the timeframe for study and/or comment by all parties who receive the report and recommendations, including legislative and executive personnel, the anticipated completion of review/deliberation, and any deadlines imposed either internally or externally.
5. Please add my name and contact information on the list of people to be informed of all meetings, and please copy me on all documents: Paddy Shaffer, firstname.lastname@example.org, 614-761-0621.
According to a phone conversation with Brian Green, I understand that Mr. Nance will need to share this information with me. He has not yet returned my call, and this is a very timely matter. I am copying this letter to all of you in the hope I will receive a timely and meaningful response.
I had requested permission for the OEJC to observe the Project Everest testing by phone several times, and in writing prior to and on November 7, 2007, and on November 22, 2007. These requests were denied by Mr. Nance in a letter dated November 30, the last day of testing, and the letter arrived via email on Sunday, December 2 at 4:06 p.m. This was neither a timely nor meaningful response.
This above request is a matter of legitimate and public interest to the citizens of Ohio and the citizens represented by the OEJC, and we would appreciate the courtesy of a speedy response.
Given that the process as publicly reported is apparently outside the regular course of executive/legislative decision-making as well as the significant public interest in the results of this process, we would also appreciate up-dated information should any of the above requested information be changed or revised in the course of the process.
I would also like to know who reviewed the package of information that included the Nevada and Washington state product liability lawsuits regarding voting machines that we delivered to your office on November 30, 2007. These were provided as a possible template for a recall and refund regarding the Ohio voting machines. Whom shall we call to discuss the package?
Thank you for your time and attention.
Ohio Election Justice Campaign
cc: The Ohio Election Justice Campaign
Mark Niquette - Dispatch
Mark Kovac – Vindy News
Jon Craig - Cincinnati Inquirer
Ian Urbina – New York Times
Mary Ann Gould – Voice of the Voters
Back to Main Page