 Nov. 28, 2005 Dean Logan – Statement on deliberations of voter registration challengesToday, the King County Canvassing Board ruled on 192 voter registration challenges made by Lori Sotelo, senior vice president of the King County Republican Party and seven challenges made by Richard Pope. Of those, the Board accepted 58 challenges and rejected 141 challenges against voters who cast a ballot in the Nov. 8, 2005 election, on the grounds that the challengers did not meet the high burden of proof required by state law. King County's Elections Director Dean Logan announced that in those cases where some doubt remains regarding the validity of challenged registrations, King County Elections will be contacting the voters in question to properly resolve the issue. If there is just cause, questionable registrations will be forwarded to the King County Prosecuting Attorney to analyze whether further actions are warranted. "While the challengers failed to meet the high burden of proof required in state law with respect to a majority of the challenges, King County Elections will take further steps in the immediate future to review the evidence provided at the challenge hearings," Logan said. "This alternative approach was suggested to the challenging parties earlier this year in an effort to build a partnership in addressing concern for the accuracy and integrity of the voter rolls without bias or political motives. We will continue to promote such partnerships as we look further into the information provided in these challenges. "With respect to today's developments, the law clearly protects the voter. State and federal laws are written in a manner to encourage voter enfranchisement. Our interpretation of the law and policies to maintain the integrity of the voter rolls has been consistent with the spirit of the law, which favors voter enfranchisement and guards against disruption to voter participation. "State law correctly puts the burden on the challenger to prove a voter's registration is not valid. Given the seriousness of the issue, the threshold for denying a citizen the right to vote must be high. Therefore, it is incumbent on the challenger to meet all the requirements of the law, including the requirement that he or she provide the actual address at which the challenger believes the voter resides. That requirement is important because of the real risk of casting suspicion on a voter because he shares an address with private mail box or commercial storage facility. "In the majority of challenges, the evidence provided to the Canvassing Board did not establish a residential address other than what was provided by the voter, nor did they present clear and convincing evidence that the voter does not reside at the address listed on their registration. "The threshold for challenging a voter's registration is high. Incomplete and insufficient evidence based on an Internet searches, digital photographs, and third party database analysis does not meet the clear and convincing standard established in state law. This methodology resulted in the withdrawal of more than 170 challenges when it was determined that the information was inaccurate. "These challenges have pointed to the hazards of blanket challenges based on anything less than detailed, personal knowledge. The registrations of hundreds of people were erroneously challenged, possibly impacting their willingness to cast a vote and participate in our democratic process. The burden of proof is heavy and rightfully so — It rightly lies with the challenger. "At the same time, King County Elections has a responsibility to respond to anecdotal evidence of invalid voter registrations. We will take steps to contact these voters and advise them of the proper requirements for registration — seeking their cooperation in clearing up any outstanding issues. Maintaining our voter rolls is a partnership between King County Elections and voters. The very nature of voter registration relies on individuals' providing complete and accurate information that they meet the qualifications to be registered. "Testimony provided during the challenge hearings indicated that registration at a mail box facility or similar locations was often the result of a person trying to find a way to participate on our democracy while protecting their safety or while overcoming the logistical challenges of a non-traditional residence. People who live on houseboats registered to a mailing facility because their mail cannot be delivered directly to their residence. In other cases, the voters' use of such an address was based on an innocent failure to recognize the registration requirements. Our procedures need to take the varying reasons for such registrations into account and follow state elections laws. "King County Elections is committed to maintaining the integrity of our voter registration rolls and to protecting the right of eligible citizens to vote." The challenges were among 1,944 challenges alleging the voters were improperly registered to a post office or personal mail box instead of a residential address. The Canvassing Board conducted hearings last week on the validity of the registrations of 199 voters whose registrations were challenged and who voted in the General Election. Lori Sotelo, vice president of the King County Republican Party challenged 192 registrations and Richard Pope challenged the registrations of seven voters. The Canvassing Board issued its final ruling on those registrations today in time to count the valid ballots and certify the election tomorrow, Nov. 29. The votes cast by the 140 people whose challenged registrations were rejected will be counted and included in the certified election results. Prior to the hearings, 178 of the challenges were withdrawn by Sotelo. The remaining challenges will be handled administratively. King County Elections will contact the challenged voters and ask them to verify they live at the address they are registered to or provide a valid residential address. "A citizen's right to vote is a sacred pillar of our democracy," Logan said. "Any challenge to this right should not be brought lightly or ruled on without due consideration." |
Updated: Nov. 28, 2005
Links to external sites do not constitute endorsements by King County. |