S.F., State Wade Into Vote Count Controversy

For many around City Hall, the script for recent election vote counts reads like a cross between a Monty Python skit and an episode of “The Twilight Zone.”

Like the year wet ballots had to be dried in a microwave before they could be counted, not to mention foul-ups involving duplicate and lost vote cards.

More troubling, officials said, state investigators were called in this year to probe accusations of vote tampering and the misuse of $1 million on Department of Elections salaries in a city agency whose administrator is appointed by Mayor Willie Brown.

The district attorney’s office also is looking into claims of fiscal improprieties, and Supervisor Tony Hall has threatened to call in federal investigators if he doesn’t get answers.

“What’s going on here is dangerous, it’s criminal and, frankly, it’s embarrassing,” Hall said. “There’s machine politics at work. And everybody but the voters is being represented.”

In the contentious world of San Francisco politics, the accusations are flying like never before.

But key developments this month have led officials to believe that help may be in sight for an increasingly troubled Department of Elections, which has seen five directors in as many years.

Weary of continued finger-pointing, San Francisco voters recently passed a long-debated election reform measure. Proposition E creates a seven-member commission of elected officials to oversee the vote count process, making San Francisco the first city nationwide to establish such a review board, officials said.

Insiders said the move also shrinks the political power of Brown, whose chief administrative officer runs the Department of Elections and hires its director.

Recanvassing Is Considered

Today, Secretary of State Bill Jones’ office will unveil the results of a six-month investigation into allegations of misappropriation and voter fraud in 2000.

Supervisors said Tuesday that they were told by Department of Elections officials that state investigators uncovered “numerous discrepancies” in a random sampling of 21 precincts.

One precinct included a 199-vote gap between the number counted and recorded. “In my opinion, this is the evidence of voter fraud that we have said existed all along,” said Supervisor Matt Gonzalez, a coauthor of Proposition E.

Though he said he could not confirm the results of the state probe, City Administrator Bill Lee said Tuesday that “we are strongly reconsidering a recanvassing of some 300,000 votes cast in the November 2000 election and December 2000 Board of Supervisors runoff.”

Last year’s election included a hard-fought growth measure that was defeated by a slim margin, and supervisors said those results could now be cast in doubt.

In a recanvass, officials compare the number of votes cast in each precinct with those registered by election officials.

Activists said the state results will verify a conclusion already reached by many San Francisco residents: that their votes are being cast into a black hole.

“One thing we could always say about San Francisco is that the city is fairly honest--but not anymore,” said Jim Chappell, president of the nonprofit San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Assn.

This year’s elections--which featured two high-profile public power proposals and several bond measures--saw one of the lowest voter turnouts in city history. Said Chappell: “Residents feel, ‘Why should I bother? It’s all corrupt anyway.’ This process needs to be squeaky-clean.”

City officials have countered that in the emotional domain of San Francisco politics, special interest groups will quickly call foul any time one of their issues is defeated.

“San Francisco politics is like a blood sport--there’s always some wicked conspiracy theory being floated,” said Lee, a Brown appointee who hires the Department of Elections director. “If you look at any of our elections--and I’ve been through 16 in six years--no one has ever proven an accusation of fraud.”

Claims of Vote Tampering Made

The most recent flurry of investigations began after last year’s election when Hall complained that votes had been tampered with during a close race with an opponent backed by Brown. Hall was eventually declared the winner despite three recounts.

“I won by 39 votes, but it could have been thousands; whole precincts vanished,” Hall said. “I was hit by a machine like the Taliban was hit by the U.S. government. They went with everything in their arsenal, including three recounts.”

Though claiming to have evidence of vote tampering that led to the disappearance of 3,800 to 7,000 ballots, Hall did not offer that information to state officials. “I want to see what they come out with this week before I come forward,” he said. “I would still like to see federal investigators take a look at this system.”

Last year, charges also flew when the acting deputy director of the Department of Election, Phil Paris, accused two officials of improperly counting votes and signing time sheets for work not done.

At the time, Paris was under investigation by the city attorney’s office for alleged illegal fund-raising on the job.

San Francisco Dist. Atty. Terence Hallinan, whose office is investigating Paris’ claims, has yet to conclude his probe, a spokesman said.

But City Atty. Louise Renne said the accusations lack merit. “He found out that we were looking at his misuse of the office for political purposes,” she said of Paris. “And in a preemptive strike he made a series of allegations that run the gamut of the kitchen sink. In my view, it’s all a red herring.”

This year, public power advocates who barely lost a race to unseat hometown Pacific Gas & Electric Co. complained when votes were removed from City Hall for counting after an alleged anthrax threat. Absentee ballots arriving in the mail were moved to a different building and could have been tampered with, the advocates said.

Many dismiss the claims.

“Election fraud is a strong term to throw around without evidence,” said P.J. Johnston, a spokesman for Brown. “People like to jump on the vote count process. When things don’t go their way, it’s the first thing they do.”

Supervisor Tom Ammiano agreed. “In this city, so much is personally invested in many ballot measures that close elections result in charges and countercharges. We’re all fed up with it.”

Supporters hope Proposition E will win back voter confidence. Beginning in January, seven city agencies--including the city attorney’s office, public defender and Board of Education--will each appoint one member to a new Elections Commission.

The new system will require poll workers to declare how many ballots were cast at their site and the results of the vote. Sheriff’s deputies will escort the ballots from the precincts to City Hall.

“I think it will go a long way to eliminate areas where political influence and orchestrating can take place,” Hall said. “This past election was the last under the old system. The last chance for chicanery. The last hurrah.”

Doug Comstock was another who welcomed the new commission. In 1997, Comstock sued the Department of Elections on behalf of a nonprofit called the Voter Integrity Project.

The suit alleged the existence of mismatched voter signatures, residents who cast more than one ballot, and precincts that opened early in key districts. The district attorney’s office investigated but declined to file charges.

“We always thought that these things were the result of more than sloppy work, that they signaled criminal wrongdoing,” Comstock said. “Maybe now they’ll listen.”