1981-04-25 Special Called Meeting

Browse Search

• • Minutes, Special Called Meeting • April 25, 1981, Page 2 The Public counter on the absentee machine shows 327 persons voted as does the signature roster (322 in person and the Election Judge received 5 ballots by mail which were registered on the machine). All three races were on one machine. The machine has lock out devices which when pushed or pulled as the case may be, allow the voter when he enters the machine to vote in only one race. The descrepency is if you will look on the absentee vote total you will find that all the absentee votes cast total 339 rather than 327. That is a descrepency of 12 votes. It is the view of the gentleman who is here from the Harris County Voting Machine Department and I think the only possible explaination that in twelve (12) instances there was a failure to push or pull the proper locking devices on the absentee voting machine, resulting in the case that either one voter voted in two races or one voter voted in three races. Mathematically I do not think we can determine in which race the illegal votes were cast. I think the only thing we can determine is that 12 illegal votes were cast. In election law an error in an election has to be such that it effects the out- come. That is not the case in Districts 2 and 4. In District 2 the winner in that race has a clear vote margin of 18 votes. In District 4 the winner has a clear vote margin of 29. I • think that would be a sufficient number to overcome any error. However, in District 5 the margin is only 4 votes, we have no way of knowing in which race the 12 illegal votes were cast but if you assume the worst possible case, you must assume in each race that those votes were cast in each seperate race and how would it effect the outcome if you gave those 12 votes to the looser. If you gave those twelve (12) votes to the loosing canidate in District 2 it doesn't effect the outcome. If you give those 12 votes to the loosing canidate in District 4 it does not effect the outcome. However, in District 5 if you give the looser the benefit of the 12 votes the winner can't clear it by more than that b ecause he doesn't have but a margin of 4 votes. It is therefore my view, I've never seen a situation like this before, but it is my view that the Council can declare winners in District 2 and 4 but it would appear to me unless someone can come up with a solution of how we could determine the facts and I don't know how it could be. We will be faced with another election in District 5. Motion was made by Councilperson Simons to accept the results from District 2 and District 4 and have a re-election in District 5. Seconded by Councilman Faris. Mayor Meza stated; "We have a motion on the floor and a second, we would ask Councilperson Faris if he desires to withdraw his second?" •