We conclude, based on our observations and analysis of audit reports submitted to the Secretary of the State that the November post-election audits still do not inspire confidence…Among our greatest concerns are the discrepancies between machine counts and hand-counts reported to the Secretary of the State by several municipalities. In many cases, these discrepancies are not thoroughly and reasonably explained. We believe that the ad-hoc counting procedures used by many municipalities were not sufficient to count ballots accurately and efficiently
In some cases as many as twenty-four (24) fewer ballots were counted by hand than recorded by optical scanners.
For individual candidate races, vote counts between hand counts and scanner tapes varied by as much as three-hundred-sixty-six (366) votes in one race or as much as 46% in another.
We find no reason to attribute all errors to either humans or machines.
Despite continued improvements to the published procedures, the August post-election audit observations do not inspire increased confidence… the lack of standards and detailed guidance, and the lack of consistency, reliability, and transparency in the conduct of the audit continues.
We find potential risks to the integrity of and confidence in the reported results of post-election audits based on the lack of uniformly secure ballot storage and access.
Looking forward, we doubt the current ad-hoc counting procedures used by most municipalities will prove sufficient to accurately and efficiently count ballots considering the expected volume in the November 2008 election.
many of the audits, as observed, leave us uncertain as to whether an error or fraud would have been detected in an audited race where we were not present to observe. We also question the security of the chain of custody to protect the integrity of ballots before the audits and to protect the integrity of ballots and tabulators after the audits such that further audits and investigations could effectively be performed.
Many of the audits, as observed, leave us uncertain as to whether an error or fraud would have been detected in an audited race in this election…The coalition recommends that the Secretary of the State provide local elections officials with specific directions for auditing and reporting, make a full public report of all post-election audit results, and establish clear criteria for further investigation of audit discrepancies.