March 27, 2006
Truth held hostage in Pierce County: Day 25

Pierce County Auditor Pat McCarthy again refuses my request for Pierce County voter registration transaction logs

Pierce County cannot produce a transaction log of its voter registration records or absentee ballot records therefore we have no public records responsive to your request
I believe that in this instance "cannot" is bureaucrat speak for "doesn't want to". Pierce County uses the same DIMS system that King County uses and the capability to produce transaction logs is there. My preliminary analysis of more limited records shows that among the other large counties, Pierce County has, after King County, the second worst rate of duplicate registrations and double voting per population. The transaction logs would provide a lot more detail on the quality of Pierce County Elections work product. Every Pierce County voter and every candidate who runs in Pierce County should be concerned about this issue and demand that McCarthy be forthcoming with the records. McCarthy is up for re-election this year. If she's not held to comply with the law and disclose her office's work records now, why should she be any more transparent if and when she's re-elected?

[Previous correspondence on this records request here, here and here]

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at March 27, 2006 12:16 PM | Email This
Comments
1. Um, I think that I have pointed out that if you want to see something that makes King County politicians look as pure as the wind driven snow take a look at the politicians and political appointments in Pierce County. No surprise here.

Posted by: jdh on March 27, 2006 12:39 PM
2. Yep. Cannot can be, "we cannot because we destroyed the logs," or, "we cannot because we don't want too," or, "we cannot because we're incompetent," or, "we cannot because we'd not get re-elected," or, "we cannot because it will show that we're corrupt," or, "we cannot because we'd go to jail."

Posted by: Obi-Wan on March 27, 2006 12:45 PM
3. Reminds me of cockroaches when you turn on the light.

Posted by: JCM on March 27, 2006 12:47 PM
4. It doesn't surprise me that Pierce County would behave in an arrogant fashion. The annex on South 35th Street in Tacoma is home to some of the most self-entitled government LOSERS around. If these people had to find real jobs they'd starve to death!

I went in there to get an issue settled about my car registration, and the arrogant b*tch "waiting" on me was acting like she was doing me a favor to be there. The place is like a mini-Democratic Convention, too. It's obvious that nothing but big government people work there, so it's no surprise, Stefan, that you scare the bejeepers out of them.

Pierce County may not be as "blue" as King County, but it ain't far behind!

Posted by: Skylar Vandergrift on March 27, 2006 12:52 PM
5. Thanks, Stefan, for trying to keep these people honest. It affects all of us!

Posted by: Michele on March 27, 2006 01:13 PM
6. Skylar,

I'll second that. And Pierce County and Tacoma permitting are the same way. They all act like they are doing you a favor to even talk to you, and if you so much as bat an eye, they put your project on hold, move it to the bottom of their stack, etc. All government gone wild.

McCarthy come from the same "circle the wagon/ we are Democrats, and we are entitled by birthright" club as Logan et. al. The good people of this state have been asleep at the wheel for many years while the Democrats Government has grown and grown. The Dems are working hard on running the state into the ground and running big business out. But it will still be a while before even their base realizes they've ruined Washington and votes them out, so we can get on with rebuilding the state.

Posted by: Jeff B. on March 27, 2006 02:07 PM
7. Jeff B,
I cannot say that I have shared that experience regarding people working in Tacoma's permitting section. I have had nothing but good experiences with them. When it comes to the County Executive however, I have more use for a pole cat than I do for either he or his crew.

Posted by: JDH on March 27, 2006 02:35 PM
8. Stefan, a couple of the links on correspondence don't work.

Posted by: South County on March 27, 2006 02:38 PM
9. South County -- sorry, and thanks for letting me know. The links are fixed now.

Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on March 27, 2006 02:45 PM
10. If they don't give the information, there *must* be something to hide.

Keep on them Stefan!

Posted by: SP Fan on March 27, 2006 03:59 PM
11. I wonder if there has been any e-mail or telephone calls between McCarthy/Logan/Terwilliger or there Prosecuting Attorneys or surrogates on this records request Stefan???
Clearly, there is a "circle the wagons" mentality among many, but not all, County Auditors & Sam Reed. There are clearly some exceptions.

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on March 27, 2006 04:07 PM
12. Actually, this may be a case of government at its worst. Public Records Requests can be "dodged" by ignoring the "SPIRIT" of the request....and doing a little "depends what your definition of is, is" doublespeak. In the "SPIRIT" of the Public Records Act, these Election Officials really ought to be contacting you Stefan and telling you what they CAN provide you with....rather than looking at your words, KNOWING what you want and then rationalizing a "dodge".

Did they comply with your Request if they cannot provide a Transaction Log of the Voter Reg Database but CAN provide a Voter Log of each Voter Record????

Man, these guys are working overtime to avoid this one!! Too bad they have MET THEIR MATCH!

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on March 27, 2006 04:45 PM
13. I say we put another few nickels in the Stefan "Sue the State for the information they must release fund".

I notice the trolls are quiet on this one.

Posted by: GS on March 27, 2006 04:48 PM
14. This is the same Pat McCarthy who completely missed the fact that one of the candidates for the Pierce County Charter Review Commission was not eligible to vote, and hence not eligible to serve on the commission. She should be called to account for that at the very least, especially since said candidate was elected and had to be removed.

Posted by: Nathan Azinger on March 27, 2006 06:39 PM
15. Skylar and Jeff B. - so true. Like I said before, it's only been recently that King County has taken the crown of corrupt elections from Pierce. These folks have decades of experience passed on from one office holder to the next. I wouldn't be surprised if Logan got some advice from McCarthy over the last year and a half with regards to hiding election problems and even potential fraud (but I'm not accusing anyone).

One of the things you'll find about Pierce County is that the power structure is pervasive. It's not just a stronghold in county government, it's in local offices of state government and even federal, in business, education and any other large sector who wants to conduct their business here. You have to go along to get along or you might as well leave. But maybe an outsider can get something done.

Posted by: Republican (by default) on March 27, 2006 06:47 PM
16. Slightly OT.

Apparently Tennessee has some problems too.

Jennings Bernard, a daily talk radio show host, has voted in the wrong district for the past 32 years. Bernard has rubbed elbows with some of Shelby County's top leaders. He even has a picture of himself side by side with the chairman of the election commission.

For rest of story, go to:
http://www.wreg.com/Global/story.asp?S=4670044

Posted by: Janet on March 27, 2006 07:01 PM
17. Stefan, I see that the cost of the public disclosure request is $625. Do you need to put the tip jar out again?

Posted by: South County on March 27, 2006 07:10 PM
18. Court Rules Felons With Outstanding Fines Can Vote

http://www.komotv.com/stories/42628.htm

Reading the current law, I don't know how the judge interpreted it this way. My reading of it seems to be that the financial obligations must be completed as well. If this is true, then the legislature should be the ones to change the law, not a King County judge.

Article VI, SECTION 3 WHO DISQUALIFIED.
All persons convicted of infamous crime unless restored to their civil rights and all persons while they are judicially declared mentally incompetent are excluded from the elective franchise. [AMENDMENT 83, 1988 House Joint Resolution No. 4231, p 1553. Approved November 8, 1988.]

RCW 29A.08.660
Felony offender — Completion of sentence. (Effective January 1, 2006.)

(1) When a felony offender has completed all the requirements of his or her sentence, the county clerk shall immediately transmit this information to the secretary of state along with information about the county where the conviction occurred and the county that is the last known residence of the offender. The secretary of state shall maintain such records as part of the elections data base.

(2) If the offender has completed all the requirements of all of his or her sentences for all of his or her felony convictions, the secretary of state shall transmit information about the restoration of the former felon's voting rights to the county auditor where the conviction took place and, if different, the county where the felon was last known to reside.


[2005 c 246 § 12.]

RCW 29A.08.520
Felony conviction — Restoration of voting rights. (Effective January 1, 2006.)
(1) Upon receiving official notice of a person's conviction of a felony in either state or federal court, if the convicted person is a registered voter in the county, the county auditor shall cancel the defendant's voter registration. Additionally, the secretary of state in conjunction with the department of corrections, the Washington state patrol, the office of the administrator for the courts, and other appropriate state agencies shall arrange for a quarterly comparison of a list of known felons with the statewide voter registration list. If a person is found on a felon list and the statewide voter registration list, the secretary of state or county auditor shall confirm the match through a date of birth comparison and suspend the voter registration from the official state voter registration list. The canceling authority shall send to the person at his or her last known voter registration address a notice of the proposed cancellation and an explanation of the requirements for restoring the right to vote once all terms of sentencing have been completed. If the person does not respond within thirty days, the registration must be canceled.

(2) The right to vote may be restored by, for each felony conviction, one of the following:

(a) A certificate of discharge issued by the sentencing court, as provided in RCW 9.94A.637;

(b) A court order restoring the right, as provided in RCW 9.92.066;

(c) A final order of discharge issued by the indeterminate sentence review board, as provided in RCW 9.96.050; or

(d) A certificate of restoration issued by the governor, as provided in RCW 9.96.020.


[2005 c 246 § 15; 2004 c 267 § 126; 2003 c 111 § 233. Prior: 1994 c 57 § 42. Formerly RCW 29.10.097.]


Notes:
Effective date -- 2005 c 246: See note following RCW 10.64.140.

RCW 9.94A.637
Discharge upon completion of sentence — Certificate of discharge — Obligations, counseling after discharge.

(1)(a) When an offender has completed all requirements of the sentence, including any and all legal financial obligations, and while under the custody and supervision of the department, the secretary or the secretary's designee shall notify the sentencing court, which shall discharge the offender and provide the offender with a certificate of discharge by issuing the certificate to the offender in person or by mailing the certificate to the offender's last known address.

(b)(i) When an offender has reached the end of his or her supervision with the department and has completed all the requirements of the sentence except his or her legal financial obligations, the secretary's designee shall provide the county clerk with a notice that the offender has completed all nonfinancial requirements of the sentence.

(ii) When the department has provided the county clerk with notice that an offender has completed all the requirements of the sentence and the offender subsequently satisfies all legal financial obligations under the sentence, the county clerk shall notify the sentencing court, including the notice from the department, which shall discharge the offender and provide the offender with a certificate of discharge by issuing the certificate to the offender in person or by mailing the certificate to the offender's last known address.

(c) When an offender who is subject to requirements of the sentence in addition to the payment of legal financial obligations either is not subject to supervision by the department or does not complete the requirements while under supervision of the department, it is the offender's responsibility to provide the court with verification of the completion of the sentence conditions other than the payment of legal financial obligations. When the offender satisfies all legal financial obligations under the sentence, the county clerk shall notify the sentencing court that the legal financial obligations have been satisfied....

Posted by: SouthenRoots on March 27, 2006 07:32 PM
19. Don't ya wish we could use that same response to the IRS each year?

Posted by: righton on March 27, 2006 07:38 PM
20. Can anyone point me to the 'unless the law is illogical' section in our state constitution because I'm positive that's what this decision is based on.

Posted by: mykela on March 27, 2006 08:40 PM
21. SayWA?!?!

http://www.king5.com/localnews/stories/NW_032706WABfelonvotersJK.69b1f3f3.html

Some felons can vote??

Posted by: SP Fan on March 27, 2006 09:26 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?