From: Sarah W. Cooper 
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 4:16 PM
To: jim.fletcher@comcast.net

Subject: Oct. 26 Mail-in Ballot Boulder County Poll Watcher report:
Cooper

    NOTE: Watcher Captain Jim Fletcher commented,
         "You have got to read this from one of my watchers.
          I can’t believe this is part of our system.
          The Clerk here in Boulder County has created a
          psychology in her staff that watchers are the enemy
          to the representative democratic process [see last
          paragraph], how sad for the voters of Boulder County."

Sarah Cooper's email describes Boulder County Clerk's Mail
ballot signature verification procedures:

On Oct. 26th, 2012 I arrived at 9:12am. There was little going on this
early except sorting of mail ballots into  packs of 50. I did notice
that some ballots arrived in green sleeves which I was told means that
a property owner was voting on a specific tax issue for property they
owned in the district. I was told that a purple sleeve means that it
is a first time voter that needs signature verification included in
the mail-in ballot. I did not see any. 

A class of 4th-6th graders toured the area and Hiliary gave them the
tour. That was helpful as she explained many things to them and I
listened. 

I mentioned to Mary Beth that I brought in a pair of binoculars to see
better in the signature verification room as it is impossible to see 4
ballots on the screen from 60". She asked Hilliary if that would be OK
and Hilliary said yes. (They did not work well at all so that is not
going to be the answer but I did not tell them that.) 

Today, I observed a bi-partisan group reviewing ballots that had been
identified by the first pass of signature verification as not passing
for whatever reason. There were at least two people viewing the
computer and only one ballot being viewed. That was great as I could
see from 60" what was going on since there was only one ballot. The
people seemed to do a good job and made a good effort to identify the
signature with any copies they had on record. They had the real
envelope with ballot inside to review the signature with what they had
on record. This was  good since the scans from the Bell & Howell are
so dark gray and hard to read. I was very satisfied with this but I
note that many signatures did not get this type of look when observed
4-up and going at such a fast speed. 

So my general feeling is that many ballots are 'signature verified'
4-up that might not have passed this test that the ones rejected have
to pass. Thus my feeling is that the signature verification is flawed
somewhat from allowing ballots through that did not match the
signatures. I could not tell for sure but it sure seemed to me that
many passed by very quickly and were OK'd when I did not necessarily
think they matched in the nano second I had to look at it. 

Nothing has changed from yesterday to today as to the blue line and
viewing signatures. My recommendation would be that if they want us to
stay back 60" then only one ballot should be viewed at one time
instead of 4 up. This is also recommended by me because the scanning
by the Bell& Howell is very gray and impossible to discern signatures
from 60" with 4 across in the time period of sometimes 3 seconds per
screen. I am a retired Professor from Front Range Community College
who ran the Multimedia Technology Program and was also State Leader
for Multimedia Technology. I have expertise in scanning and thus my
observation is that the scans are very mediocre. I am not sure if this
is the way they will always look due to the speed required but the
existing signatures scanned to check these signatures are excellent
compared to the Bell&Howell machine scans. I note two people from
Bell&Howell in the area so I am guessing that is that best they can
do? I did not file a complaint but that would be an issue for me if
they still view 4-up on the screens for the rest of the mail ballot
signature verification and ask us to stand no closer than 60" 

One other issue that occured Oct. 25 morning concerning the 60"
set-back. The judge viewing the screen with 4-up ballot signatures
tried to move the monitor about 1" closer to her to view. The judge
next to her said she could not do that as the monitor would be closer
than 60" for the poll watchers. She said that is what Hiliary told
her. I think this is ridiculous as it is important for the judges to
see the screens clearly from their seat and it is not important if the
screen is closer than 60". Totally absurd. 

Sincerely,

Sarah Cooper