|
May 13, 2020
 |
|
Presidential Primary Risk-Limiting Audit Pilot starts Monday
|
Over the last week, counties have been preparing the ballot manifests for use in next week’s risk-limiting audit pilot. The next step is to randomly select ballots to be audited and have local clerks retrieve them and report the votes to the county clerks. Here’s how that will work:
- Monday, May 18, at 10 a.m. - Bureau of Elections’ staff will roll 20 ten-sided dice to create a random number. The dice rolling can be viewed via Zoom. The random number will be entered into the audit software (Arlo) to generate the list of ballots to be audited.
- Monday, May 18, by 1 p.m. - Counties will download the county’s ballot retrieval list from Arlo and distribute it to the local clerks selected.
- Monday, May 18, through 1 p.m. Thursday, May 21 - Local clerks will retrieve the ballots selected, record the votes cast on each ballot on a tally sheet, and send the tally sheet to the county when complete.
- Thursday, May 21, by 4 p.m. - Counties will ensure all vote tallies for the ballots selected are entered into Arlo.
As noted before, only 670 ballots will need to be retrieved statewide. Many jurisdictions (and even a few counties) will not have to retrieve ballots; it’s simply luck of the draw.
If your jurisdiction does have to retrieve ballots, you’ll need removable labels or post-it notes and paper as supplies.
Follow these steps to retrieve the ballot(s):
- Locate the ballot container selected.
- Open the ballot container - verifying seals as you normally would.
- Pull all of the ballots out of the container and arrange them neatly (if an AVCB was selected and ballots were bundled by precinct or batched separately, locate the correct precinct/batch).
- Count down through the stack of ballots to the ballot number selected.
- Pull the selected ballot off the stack, write the batch name and ballot number on a removable label and place it on the ballot (if you don’t have removable labels, use a post-it note).
- Write the batch name and ballot number on a full sheet of paper (colored if you have it) and put it in place of the ballot you removed from the stack - we call this a placeholder.
- If you have multiple ballots to retrieve and cannot keep open containers secure, seal the ballot container back up, recording the seal number on the ballot container certificate and the reason for opening (“audit”).
Repeat the above steps until all ballots are retrieved. Once they are all retrieved, tally the votes on each ballot using this tally sheet. Then seal all of the ballots selected into an approved container. If containers were left open, seal the ballots back into the container they came from, simply by placing them on top. Send your completed tally sheet(s) to the county clerk. Your county clerk will tell you how they prefer to receive them.
A ballot-retrieval video and an instructional document are available to help you through this process. Additional support is available by emailing rla@vx.support.
Audits are meant to be a public process. As we pilot this process during times of social distancing, that is more difficult. When possible, two people should be retrieving ballots – one person should pull the ballots out of the container and count off the ballots until reaching the ballot being retrieved, while someone else observes from at least six feet away. As this is a practice pilot, it’s ok for only one person to retrieve the ballot when two is not practical. A videoconferencing method could also be used to allow a second person to observe the retrieval and count. If you need a person to videoconference, send an email to rla@vx.support and VotingWorks staff will set up a time with you to observe.
We also appreciate other methods you may find to share the ballot-retrieval process with voters. We’ve seen many counties and jurisdictions use their government Facebook accounts to live broadcast public events. Please feel free to use any public sharing methods you’ve utilized over the past few months to share the ballot-retrieval process too. This document, Risk Limiting Audits: The Basics, is helpful for answering citizen questions.
The support we’ve seen for this process over the past few weeks continues to show the dedication of Michigan clerks to secure our elections. Trying new processes is difficult and even more so in times of uncertainty. Because this is a pilot, the goal is to learn how to best conduct this type of audit – not to actually verify the outcome. The results of the Presidential Primary are the perfect election results to scale this new auditing process up and work toward the goal of conducting RLAs for all statewide elections and complying with the Proposal 18-3 requirement to audit the results of statewide elections.
 |
|
Absent Voter Applications |
The online August/November absent voter ballot application is available online at the Bureau of Elections website and the Bureau has provided updated instructions for vendor-produced forms. Jurisdictions with existing August/November stock can continue to use those forms even if they do not have updated instructions. An updated application that clerks can download from the Qualified Voter File will be available by the end of the day tomorrow. We will put up an announcement banner in QVF when the application is ready.
Following last week’s News Update, in which we advised clerks to proceed with their absent voter ballot application mailings for the August Election, the Bureau received several inquiries from clerks asking if they could send absent voter ballot applications to all registered voters - not just those on the permanent absent voter application list.
Clerks have expressed interest in sending applications to all voters given concerns about COVID -19, the expected increase in voting by mail and interest in handling absent voter ballot applications over a longer time period. They have also asked about the remaining uncertainty of in-person voting for the August election (as of now, clerks should presume that polling places will be open as always). Some clerks have also asked the Bureau’s opinion on whether sending applications to all voters is allowable.
Because this is a legal question, clerks should consult with their own municipal or county counsel in considering the issue. The Bureau’s view is that municipal or county clerks are not prohibited from distributing absent voter ballot applications to registered voters. The Bureau is mindful of two court cases, Taylor v Currie, 277 Mich App 85, 97 (2007), and Fleming v Macomb County Clerk, 2008 WL 2553266 (Ct App Mich June 26, 2008, unpublished), that prohibited a city and county clerk, respectively, from sending absent voter ballot applications to specific subsets of their voters. Significantly, those cases were decided before Michigan’s Constitution was amended and under circumstances different from the present, so they are distinguishable from a current city- or countywide AV application mailings in several respects.
In both those cases, the courts noted that applications for AV ballots were not being sent to all voters, but only a select few. The courts understood this selective mailing as helping the clerks in their efforts to get elected. This would not be the case in a mailing to every registered voter eligible to vote in the jurisdiction.
Both of those cases were decided before the voters’ adoption of Proposal 2018-3, which amended Michigan’s Constitution to provide an express constitutional right to an absent voter ballot for all registered voters. The statutory requirements interpreted in those cases assumed that voters must have a reason to apply for an absent voter ballot. That reasons were needed in order to qualify for a ballot, and that only some voters would qualify for those reasons, were an essential part of the courts’ decisions. A new mailing program in which all voters were mailed applications would have to be reconsidered in light of the new state constitutional framework in Article II, Section IV of the Michigan Constitution.
Additionally, neither of those cases involved the emergency circumstances of an unprecedented worldwide pandemic. Whatever the policy and legal considerations of sending voters absent voter ballot applications in 2007 and 2008, there is now a clear health and security basis for informing voters of their fundamental right to vote by mail and a benefit to public safety during this time.
The courts in those cases also noted that the clerk mailing applications was on the ballot. To the extent that would be a concern for any clerks sending applications in this situation, the clerk should simply send applications and envelopes that do not have the clerk’s name on it. The Bureau of Elections’ position, in general, for election-year mailings is that it is not unlawful for clerks to include their names on election mailings and products (other than ballots and ballot envelopes), but that clerks may wish to consider excluding their name as it would invite a complaint.
Again, it is possible that a court will end up deciding this issue once again, so it is important for clerks to consult with their legal counsel before making any decision whether to mail applications to all voters.
Regardless of whether clerks wish to send all registered voters absent voter ballot applications, the Bureau recommends clerks do as much as possible to encourage voters to apply for absent voter ballots. Many clerks have asked whether there will be any special rules, similar to the May election, for the August or November elections. As of now, there have been no changes to in-person voting rules for either August or November.
Election officials can also take other steps to encourage more voters to register and cast ballots remotely. It will be beneficial to have a higher percentage of voters casting ballots by mail rather than coming to precincts and potentially creating crowding. Another tool to promote more voting by mail is the permanent absent voter ballot application list. Registered voters can join the list at the Michigan Voter Information Center, as shared in last week’s update. Local jurisdictions have also built signup tools, such as Washtenaw County and the City of Lansing.
 |
|
Absent Voter Ballot Envelope Update |
As announced in last week’s update, the Bureau of Elections is funding and facilitating testing of custom-printed absent voter ballot envelopes for all jurisdictions. For August, the Bureau will fund envelopes sufficient to cover 40 percent of each local jurisdiction’s registered voters. Jurisdictions should continue to place orders with vendors.
Custom-printed envelopes will include all design elements mandated by the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) to ensure envelopes move through the mail system efficiently – including preprinted clerk mailing addresses, intelligent mail barcodes, facing identification marks, and election mail logos. Custom envelopes are more efficient and result in fewer problems than blank “stock” envelopes, which require clerks to address each individual envelope properly and which cannot be efficiently run through post office equipment.
Custom-printed envelopes also allow for vendors to test designs with USPS, which means local jurisdictions do not have to do it. Testing is underway.
Many jurisdictions have already been using custom-printed envelopes that likely meet USPS design specifications. If you have already been using custom envelopes or if you have ordered custom envelopes, your envelope design may not change at all. The only differences will be that the vendors will test your envelopes for you, and you will be reimbursed equal to the amount the Bureau would have spent on your envelopes.
Jurisdictions with stock envelopes will see those envelopes replaced with custom-printed envelopes. Again, vendors will test those envelopes with USPS. Jurisdictions should retain their old stock envelopes for use with in-person absent voter ballots that do not need to go in the mail.
Custom-printed envelopes for August will not have a prepaid postage indicia on the green envelopes – they will be courtesy reply envelopes – but jurisdictions that already have been ordering postage prepaid return envelopes can continue to do so at their own expense. Jurisdictions that are interested in ordering custom-printed envelopes with prepaid postage markings should contact their vendors. If jurisdictions are interested in adding postage to their green return envelopes with stamps or a postage meter, they should contact the Bureau of Elections to discuss this process. The Bureau is assessing the feasibility of custom-printed envelopes with prepaid postage for November.
 |
|
US Postal Service Ballot Envelope Guidelines |
The U.S. Postal Service has provided a Michigan Ballot Envelope Design Guide for clerks. It explains all the mandatory elements and their placement. The last page of the guide contains tips for voters when returning their ballot. You can share this page on your website, through social media, and in print with your voters.
 |
|
May Election Statistics |
The May 5 election was the first of its kind in Michigan – voters cast ballots primarily by mail, with limited in-person voting. All registered voters were mailed AV applications, and ballot return envelopes were sent postage prepaid. Overall, the May 5 election saw record turnout for a May election and record percentages of ballots cast by mail.
 The May 5 election turnout – 25 percent of registered voters – was a record for a May election, and represented a 67 percent increase from the 15 percent turnout in 2019 (which itself was higher than past years). Additionally, the vast majority voted by mail. According to data reported by local election officials, 99 percent of ballots were delivered by postal mail or delivered to drop boxes rather than in person. It’s possible that some in-person absentee voters were reported as by mail (or the other way around) but local officials also reported receiving the overwhelming majority of ballots by mail.
Because of the unique nature of the May election, it is unclear exactly how these numbers will translate to August and November, but these data points may be helpful in preparing for future elections.
 The graph below illustrates the number of voters who registered within the two-week window prior to or on Election Day and went to their local clerk’s office to provide some form of residency verification – required if they wanted to receive a ballot for the May 5 election. Although the number was significantly lower than March, more than 100 voters did register within the 2-week window.
|
