34 South Main St., Attleboro, MA - Directions - (508) 222-7000
Home News Sports Features classifieds milestones services photos tvlistings cars jobs realestate subscribe
News

City tries to sort out election mix-up




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.

 


*Member ID:
*Password:
  Forgot Your Password?
 
View Comments » 8 comment(s) « Hide Comments

ricknkim wrote on Nov 7, 2009 7:32 PM:

" I didn't see anything in the article noting the calls were made before the polls closed - how would election officials and Ms. Allard obtain voting all these numbers prior to poll closure? I think it was simply an over-eager candidate making a call prematurely and interrupting election officials trying to get counting done. A new guideline should be issued whereas nobody contacts the election officials until they have finished their work. "

s-plumb wrote on Nov 7, 2009 6:09 PM:

" The way I read this...It appears that Councilor Allard, after being given information that she had lost her bid for re-election, asked for clarification.
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, if the call was made before the polls closed it would be an influence on the election. "

ricknkim wrote on Nov 7, 2009 9:24 AM:

" In this age of instant gratification and lack of patience, the officials and Ms. Allard tried to get a "rough" count and results prematurely. The fact that Allard tried to take results she got from other precincts and add them to some of the incomplete results from the election office was a simple attempt at adding all the precincts together to get a complete "pie", not influencing the election.

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:

" this happened back in 2004,ballots from another town were given to voters, check it out... "

ucbruin wrote on Nov 7, 2009 8:03 AM:

" I have been critical of Ms. Allard and the entire City Council for their lack of oversight regarding the IBP/ARA. And because of her willingness to post her comments on this site, I have, at times, singled her out with my comments. But in her defense regarding this article I don't believe that she is the only candidate who probably phoned the election committee on election night. Maybe a new rule should be implemented which prevents anyone from interrupting the vote counting process. Common sense to me. So let's not single out Ms. Allard by shining the spotlight solely on her. "

bingo wrote on Nov 7, 2009 7:20 AM:

" Taking numbers or information from a candidate?? Maybe Mr. Cooper should have a recount in all of the precincts. "

reason wrote on Nov 7, 2009 5:08 AM:

" A commissioner and an office worker used information from a candidate which resulted in false information being released to the public. These two workers should be removed from the commission and Allard should know better then influence the election commission. "