City tries to sort out election mix-up
BY GEORGE W. RHODES SUN CHRONICLE STAFF
Saturday, November 7, 2009 2:18 AM EST
Confused tally leaves one candidate happy, another seeking recount
ATTLEBORO - A close election, anxious candidates and telephones ringing off the hook with people giving numbers and taking numbers combined to create a well-intentioned, but botched effort by the election office to get information out quickly on election night.
The attempt caused one candidate to think he won and another to think she lost.
The opposite was true for at-large city council candidates Mark Cooper and Kim Allard.
Allard beat Cooper by 63 votes, but the first word Allard got was that she lost.
Election Commissioner Phil Daniels said a commissioner and an office worker were trying to tally votes for Allard, who had called the office, but they didn't have all the precinct results and used some information that Allard had collected.
Daniels said they were trying to "marry the two" sources to come up with a result, but for whatever reason, whether it was faulty addition, incorrect numbers or misunderstood numbers, the results were wrong.
He wasn't present during the attempt, but at a Friday meeting Daniels tried to sort out what happened with staff members and other commissioners.
What happened still is not totally clear, but what is clear is that incorrect information was released from the office, Daniels said.
"It was an unfortunate attempt to produce information when we should have said we just have to wait for the memory cards," he said referring to the electronic record of votes from the voting machines. "It was a hectic time, and we didn't do a good job of controlling it."
The confusion is one of the reasons Cooper plans to file for a recount.
Daniels said the matter will be addressed in future elections.
"It's not a pretty picture, but we'll continue to make improvements," he said.
View Comments » 8 comment(s)
« Hide Comments
ricknkim wrote on Nov 7, 2009 7:32 PM:
s-plumb wrote on Nov 7, 2009 6:09 PM:
I'm honestly tired of the negative spin against this independent, selfless individual in print almost daily.
Why is it that every time this woman moves, a negative motive is inferred?
I personally have not met a more ferocious advocate for the city.
There have been rumors that Milanoski et al targetted her, as political payback for her insistence on stricter oversight. What amazes me is that natural allies, who have the same goals as Kim, would fall into this trap instead of standing up to the power in the city, and above. If they're effective in taking one down, who'll be next? "
reason wrote on Nov 7, 2009 10:26 AM:
ricknkim wrote on Nov 7, 2009 9:24 AM:
Boy do people jump to silly conclusions - reading comprehension seems to be lacking in the boros' . . . I agree with ucbruin, the candidates should know better to leave officials alone to do their work and then they will announce when they are ready with complete and accurate numbers. Again, patience please! "
donna somers wrote on Nov 7, 2009 8:18 AM:
ucbruin wrote on Nov 7, 2009 8:03 AM:
bingo wrote on Nov 7, 2009 7:20 AM:
reason wrote on Nov 7, 2009 5:08 AM: