Conflict of Interest?
Dolske should resign from Board of Elections:
Election errors
Diebold admits mistake but not sure where skewed numbers came from
By ALAINA FAHY
The Eagle-Gazette Staff
FAIRFIELD COUNTY - Diebold Election Systems admits it is to blame for not telling the Fairfield County Board of Elections the right way to count votes for the Nov. 7 election. But the company said it has no idea exactly how the board arrived at its original incorrect tallies.
The Fairfield County Board of Elections followed the wrong procedure for counting votes after Issue 1 was removed from the ballot. The procedural error led to incorrect vote counts and some issues appearing to pass Tuesday afternoon when they did not.
There was no immediate answer Wednesday about where incorrect numbers came from, said Diebold Election Systems spokesman David Bear about why the wrong procedure led to its skewed numbers.
The initial official results were made public around 2 p.m. Tuesday, but a call from the Eagle-Gazette alerted the elections office to an error.
Elections board members say they didn't notice a problem before approving the count Tuesday afternoon because they didn't compare the unofficial results to the canvassed vote count.
''I'm wondering how such a big mistake such as this could be made,'' said Marge Foltz of Lancaster.
Bear said Diebold contacted counties across Ohio about the right procedure to use, but Fairfield County wasn't notified in time.
Bear doesn't know whether vote counts were randomly assigned to issues or why votes disappeared from categories in Tuesday's early results.
Richland County had a similar problem and notified Diebold, said Jeff Wilkinson, deputy director of the Richland County Board of Elections.
Richland County's Board of Elections did not vote to approve the canvassing until the problem was corrected, Wilkinson said.
''The numbers weren't adding up, from the unofficial to the official,'' he said. ''That's how we found it.''
The Board of Elections' role in an election is to certify the vote, which means making sure it's accurate and official, said James Lee, spokesman for the Ohio Secretary of State's Office.
The board should have looked at the results it approved, Lee said.
Foltz said anyone who looked at Fairfield County's vote tallies Tuesday afternoon should have realized there was a problem.
Foltz does not trust the election results and wants to see another count to see if it matches the final count from Tuesday night.
There will be no fourth count on any issue or race unless someone requests a recount and pays $50 per precinct, said Debbie Henderly, Fairfield County Board of Elections director.
The second canvassing of the vote Tuesday was the first time the count was done correctly, Henderly said. The same procedural error happened election night, when the board released the unofficial results on its Web site.
Foltz was especially concerned about Issue 7 - a 1.5 percent earned income tax issue for Lancaster City Schools.
She's seen three different sets of numbers for the issue and doesn't feel comfortable trusting any of them.
She wants to know why she should believe the issue passed.
''To me it looks like they were just looking for a number so it would pass,'' she said.
Henderly said the board is confident of the numbers for the second canvassing Tuesday because the board followed the correct procedure.
More about the Board
Seats on the Fairfield County Board of Elections are paid positions. Below are compensation figures for each board member.
continued...
Dolske should resign from Board of Elections:
Election errors
Diebold admits mistake but not sure where skewed numbers came from
By ALAINA FAHY
The Eagle-Gazette Staff
FAIRFIELD COUNTY - Diebold Election Systems admits it is to blame for not telling the Fairfield County Board of Elections the right way to count votes for the Nov. 7 election. But the company said it has no idea exactly how the board arrived at its original incorrect tallies.
The Fairfield County Board of Elections followed the wrong procedure for counting votes after Issue 1 was removed from the ballot. The procedural error led to incorrect vote counts and some issues appearing to pass Tuesday afternoon when they did not.
There was no immediate answer Wednesday about where incorrect numbers came from, said Diebold Election Systems spokesman David Bear about why the wrong procedure led to its skewed numbers.
The initial official results were made public around 2 p.m. Tuesday, but a call from the Eagle-Gazette alerted the elections office to an error.
Elections board members say they didn't notice a problem before approving the count Tuesday afternoon because they didn't compare the unofficial results to the canvassed vote count.
''I'm wondering how such a big mistake such as this could be made,'' said Marge Foltz of Lancaster.
Bear said Diebold contacted counties across Ohio about the right procedure to use, but Fairfield County wasn't notified in time.
Bear doesn't know whether vote counts were randomly assigned to issues or why votes disappeared from categories in Tuesday's early results.
Richland County had a similar problem and notified Diebold, said Jeff Wilkinson, deputy director of the Richland County Board of Elections.
Richland County's Board of Elections did not vote to approve the canvassing until the problem was corrected, Wilkinson said.
''The numbers weren't adding up, from the unofficial to the official,'' he said. ''That's how we found it.''
The Board of Elections' role in an election is to certify the vote, which means making sure it's accurate and official, said James Lee, spokesman for the Ohio Secretary of State's Office.
The board should have looked at the results it approved, Lee said.
Foltz said anyone who looked at Fairfield County's vote tallies Tuesday afternoon should have realized there was a problem.
Foltz does not trust the election results and wants to see another count to see if it matches the final count from Tuesday night.
There will be no fourth count on any issue or race unless someone requests a recount and pays $50 per precinct, said Debbie Henderly, Fairfield County Board of Elections director.
The second canvassing of the vote Tuesday was the first time the count was done correctly, Henderly said. The same procedural error happened election night, when the board released the unofficial results on its Web site.
Foltz was especially concerned about Issue 7 - a 1.5 percent earned income tax issue for Lancaster City Schools.
She's seen three different sets of numbers for the issue and doesn't feel comfortable trusting any of them.
She wants to know why she should believe the issue passed.
''To me it looks like they were just looking for a number so it would pass,'' she said.
Henderly said the board is confident of the numbers for the second canvassing Tuesday because the board followed the correct procedure.
More about the Board
Seats on the Fairfield County Board of Elections are paid positions. Below are compensation figures for each board member.
continued...
