Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News, FRI. 2/23/07 The Big Picture

[rumpel]

The Dieboldizing of Our Elections

In Los Angeles County Ms McCormack has been staying the course towards recommending and implementing an all electronic voting system since she arrived here a decade ago. It is still underway. Prior to Los Angeles, she was Registrar in San Diego - and before that in Texas.
Los Angeles County currently has over 4 Million voters , certainly not an easy feat considering 4500 precincts and numerous different races, districts and Cities. However, automation and convenience for the registrar should not come at the expense of openness and verifiability of each vote cast.

I was under the impression that the InkaVote system was pretty decent. The switch from a punch card system in 2003 was rather smooth for the voter as it is in principle the same little box with holes where you slide your paper ballot precisely to match the numbers. The only difference is the little pen. It does not poke a hole, it creates a dot on the bubbles. This switch cost the county 3 Million. I still get my receipt. Fair enough.
Meanwhile, elsewhere the controversy and problems of DRE's were raging and continues to this day.

According to various correspondences from Ms. McCormack to the County Supervisors, it is clear that she has wanted to install DRE's - the InkaVote is an interim solution. I believe that our County Supervisors have done a fairly good job of fending off the electronification of our end user voting system so far. The compromise, it seems, is to go slow and do this in phases.

Ms McCormack has consistently objected bills introduced in the State and urged County Supervisors to oppose bills that called to ban or require VVPAT DRE's. In April of 2004, in preparation of the 2004 elections the letter to the supervisors states:

IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT YOUR BOARD:
1. Approve the recommended position of OPPOSE regarding SB 530, SB 1723
and SB 1438.

The reasoning behind this opposition she says is that the Board has approved the touchscreen machines contract in 2002, (Diebold) of course her recommendation. The DRE acquisition at a cost to the county of 107 Million towards HAVA compliance, according to another letter. She cites the touchscreen systems to be the only units allowing the disabled to vote privately and unassisted and minorities can view the ballot in their language of choice.

Touchscreen early voting was installed in 2000 - hmmm the infamous 2000 Presidential elections. She cites not only the disabled and minorities but other voters, according to her survey of ten's of thousands of voters preferred the DRE's over the paper based systems. No attachments to support this statement is provided.
We can additionally glean from her comments that she was certainly no friend of our later ousted Secretary of State Mr. Kevin Shelley.

This measure would have the effect of ending the County’s touchscreen early
voting program until such time as system modifications are developed, tested
and certified by federal and state authorities that would produce the specified
AVVPAT.

This bill would, in effect, put into statute a directive previously promulgated by
California’s Secretary of State in November 2003 that requires:
· “…beginning July 1, 2005, no county or city may purchase a touch screen
voting system that does not include an accessible voter verified paper
audit trail (VVPAT” and that

· “As of July 2006, all touch screen voting systems used in California,
regardless of when they were purchased, must have a VVPAT that can be
used by all voters, including the visually impaired…”


Now the DRE's and InkaVote or whatever system is the end-user part of the entire voting system, and therefore the most visible. The controversies elsewhere gave Angelenos voting on InkaVote, like myself, a false sense of assurance.
Unbeknown to me other "improvements' were long under way.

Los Angeles County, based on Ms. McCormack's recommendation dumped the IBM voter registration system that was in place since the 1970's citing maintenance costs per voter. The new VIMS, (Voter Information Management System) is a proprietary software which was installed in 1998. Interestingly this is a sole source no bid 5 year contract with a vendor, Data Information Management Systems.
The company currently services more voters than any other voter registration company in the United States, supporting information for more than 14 million voters

DIMS's software is being used according to the references below for 55% of voters in California as well as in Cuyahoga, Ohio and Michigan. In early 2003 Diebold has acquired this company. Red Flag? Diebold as of 2003 has had control of 14 Million voter registrations. The electronic poll books - those, too are DIMS inventions, a wholly owned subsidiary of Diebold.
These counties had a whole year and some to "improve" their voter registration database leading up to the 2004 Presidential elections. I wonder what caused the "glitch" or discrepancy of total registered voters reported by Ms. McCormack on October 18, 2004 to the SOS of 3,972,738 to the version of 3,901,106 upon certification of the election results? The purge of registered voters constitutes 70,000 people.

http://web.mit.edu/mit-rnr/www/lists/announce.w3archive/200301/msg00006.html
bocc.cuyahogacounty.us/GSC/pdf/ elections/CERP_Final_Report_20060720.pdf
www.michigan.gov/documents/ Diebold_Cost_Detail_89491_7.pdf

Further, a bigger concern is silently brewing in an inaccessible room at the County Registrar's headquarters in Norwalk. It is the vote tabulation system. It was not long ago that citizen observers were refused entry to observe the computers tabulating the results by Ms McCormack. While it is true that starring at practically a box would not enlighten anyone as to the comings and goings inside that darn thing.
However, here are highlights from Ms McCormack's communication titled " Approve Sole Source Agreement with Data Information Management Systems for Continuation of Existing System Maintenance and Support Services of The County's Voter Information Management System", dated January 30, 2007.

Ms McCormack now has the authority to extend the contract at her or her designates sole discretion. (previously having to seek approval from the Board)
starting on page 76 of 132: Excerpts

Contractor shall provide Voter Information Management System (VIMS or System)
Software, Interfaces, and related support and maintenance services to accomplish all of
the Tasks and subtasks set forth in the Agreement and in this SOW. Such services
shall include the following:
(1) Provide onsite support and maintenance services for VIMS.
(2) Develop, test, and implement software modifications and System enhancements to
comply with requirements imposed by state, and federal statutes.
(3) Provide Interfaces to systems identified by County to automate and facilitate
information exchange.
(4) Conduct training for database administration staff and end user whenever County
requests such training.
(5) Develop both database-administration and end-user documentation whenever a new
feature or function is implemented.

TASK 1 - SUPPORT AND MAINTENANCE SERVICES
TASK 2 - SYSTEM INTERFACE PROGRAMMING AND EXECUTION
TASK 3 - WIDE AREA NETWORK ACCESS PLAN
TASK 4 - CUSTOM PROGRAMMING MODIFICATIONS
Contractor shall use the standard RR/CC software set forth below when preparing
Deliverables. Contractor shall provide Deliverables in a file format importable to the
standard RR/CC software. RR/CC standard software is as follows:
•Microsoft Word 2000 - Word Processing
•Microsoft Excel 2000 - Spreadsheet
•Microsoft PowerPoint 2000 - Project Presentations
•Microsoft Access 2000 - Database Manager
•Visio Version 2000 - Illustrations, Flowcharts, and Drawings
•Microsoft Project 2000 - Project Manager


Contractor shall provide the analysis, design, development, testing, installation and
installation testing, of software that will provide the Interfaces between VIMS and
external systems identified by County.

Subtask 2.1 -Define and Develop Interface Software for Automated Ballot Layout
(ABL) System
The Automated Ballot Layout (hereinafter "ABL") System consists of processes that
define ballot styles, vote recorder assembly sequences, and political contest rules and
descriptions. The ABL System programmatically produces the layout of official and
sample ballot pages. The ABL System is currently hosted on a mainframe and the
County is transitioning to Windows/Intel. A transaction process that shall send and
receive data to and from the ABL System and VIMS in the same format and the same
frequency as the existing interface process or a future process defined by County shall
be developed by the Contractor. Contractor shall also build and document processing
logic and map transaction files to RR/CC’s existing interface or future files.

Subtask 2.2 - Define and Develop Interface Software for Candidate and Measure
Filing System
The Candidate and Measure Filing System currently executes
on a Hewlett-Packard minicomputer platform and County intends to replace it with a
Windows/Intel based system. A transaction process that shall send and receive data to
and from Candidate and Measure Filing System and VIMS shall be in a format identified
and approved by County.

Subtask 2.3 - Define and Develop Interface Software for Election Tally System
(ETS)
The Election Tally System (ETS) programmatically tallies election results for an election.
The current ETS operates on a networked Intel client workstation platform using an
internally developed tally system called “InkaVote”. The County intends to replace it
with a vendor developed system. A transaction process that shall send and receive data
to and from ETS to VIMS in the same format and the same frequency as the existing
interface process or a future process identified by County shall be defined and
developed by Contractor.

Subtask 2.4 - Define and Develop Interface Software for both the interim and
permanent Statewide Voter Database
The CALVOTER System is the state of California's interim Statewide Voter Registration
Database. The CALVOTER System executes on computers located in Sacramento. A
transaction process that shall send and receive data to and from the CALVOTER
System and any future Statewide Voter Registration System administered and
maintained by the California Secretary of State shall be developed and implemented by
the contractor.

TASK 3 - WIDE AREA NETWORK ACCESS PLAN SPECIFICATIONS
Contractor shall, upon County’s request, submit a written report that contains
specifications for a wide area network (hereinafter "WAN") including but not limited to
(1) hardware requirements (2) software requirements (3) telecommunications
requirements (4) routing protocols required (5) recommended network design and
(6) network conceptual design. The written specifications shall make recommendations
to meet the requirements listed below.

Contractor’s written recommendations must include capability for a WAN such that: (1)
Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk branch offices shall have full access to VIMS and (2)
all of the City Clerks of Los Angeles County shall have limited access to VIMS. The
WAN for the City Clerks shall allow for:

A. Capability to access the voter file, but not to edit the voter file.
B. Capability to access the full absentee voter system.
C. Capability to check signatures and an internal tracker so that the cities in Los
Angeles County may be billed for signature look up but not for simply viewing
voter files.
D. Capability to exchange polls and officers information.
E. Capability to send voter updates to the County system tied to automatically
generated letter to voter to confirm.
F. Capability to add and access multilingual voter information.
G. Capability to add city/municipal voting history to individual voter files.
H. Capability to use electronic mail to flow documents or files to/from County
system.

This contract extending now for 5 years with this wholly owned subsidiary of Diebold is a done deal.

No matter what legislation is introduced, a private vendor controls our entire election system. The so called safe guards at every point is a waste of breath and effort. The only guardian to oversee the technology in this case of Los Angeles County is in the hands of one person at the County Project Director.

In a letter to the appointed interim CA SOS McPherson supporting Diebold to be certified for use as accurate and secure, the following county Registrars have signed this letter on November 17, 2005:

William E Schultz, El Dorado County

Victor E. Salazar, Fresno County

Carolyn CRnich, Humbolt County

Ann K. Barnett, Kern County

Theresa Nagel, Lassen County

Conny B McCormack, Los Angeles County

Michael Smith, Marin County

Marsha A Wharff, Mendocino County

Kathleen Williams, Plumas County

Colleen Baker, Siskiyou County

Deborah Hench, San Joaquin County

Julie Rodewald, San Luis Obispo County

Mikel Hass, San Diego County

Hiley R. Wallis, Tulare County

Elaine Zimmel (? - can't read handwriting), Alameda County

A question to all these counties: do you use VIMS, too?

All this at a cost of hundreds of Millions of taxpayer dollars - is it worth it? For Diebold a resounding YES.


All members welcome and encouraged to participate.

Please post Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News on this thread.

If you can:

1. Post stories and announcements you find on the web.

2. Re-post stories and announcements you find on DU, providing a link to the original thread with thanks to the Original Poster, too.

3. If you have information from an election reform activist organization outside of DU feel free to post (local or national)

4. Start a discussion thread by re-posting a story you see on this thread.

5. Election related sources
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph ...

6. If you want to know how to post "News Banners" or other images, go here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/faq.html#im ...

[rumpel]

1. Related concerns

Ethical questions about Diebold personnel

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x468130

thanks to kster - A must read!

another snip

Jeffrey Dean’s access to King County election programs was questioned by former King County Supervisor of Elections Julie Anne Kempf during her tenure (1998-2003). Kempf had been concerned about requests from King County to gain access to the Diebold GEMS central tabulator, the “mother ship” that ultimately controls ballot definitions and vote tallying. While Kempf was striving to tighten up access to the GEMS server, King County was pushing to loosen it to include remote access by King County employees outside the elections division. By this time, and at the request of King County’s voting machine maker (Global Election Systems, now Diebold), Jeffrey Dean had been given a key and 24-hour access to the King County elections software. For some reason he was working inside King County offices to develop programs for his private company and for Global Election Systems.

[rumpel]

2. McCormack

LA County Registrar of voters, Conny B. McCormack has been a long-time supporter of Diebold and their election equipment and has even been featured, via photograph and endorsement, on promotional brochures distributed by the controversial Ohio company.

http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/73/40441.html

[rumpel]

3. Embezzler Jeff Dean accessed California counties by remote in 2000 election

Attorney: "What were you doing down in California at that point?"

Jeffrey Dean: "I was trying to get the connection -- I was installing computer hardware, printing hardware, and trying to get the computer or the internet connections between a number of California counties and the server in Mountlake Terrace operational.

"In other words, be able to make the connection between the county and our data center over the internet and to upload and download test data. That's what I was doing."

Among the counties: Los Angeles (Conny McCormack); Alameda (Brad Clark, now with Calif. secretary of state's office), and Placer.

This testimony took place during civil litigation with former programmer Tae Yon Kim, and the context is installing Vote Remote software in California.

another post

For those who are enthused about mail-in voting: Jeffrey Dean created both the ballot sorting and mailing software and the authentication software used by ballot processor PSI Group and Diebold Election Systems. He also reportedly installed the mail-handling software in Las Vegas, Nev. (Sequoia Voting Systems), Maricopa County, Ariz. (ES&S), and at one point it was running in Snohomish County, Wash. as well. Jeffrey Dean's mail-in voting software has never been certified or examined at all, and it is not required to be certified.


http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/1954/17725.html

[autorank]

7. K&R This is amazing!!!

Conny is a busy body for sure! Loves that Diebold, which I understand was very fair to Arnie.

Thanks for this!!!!!!!!

[rumpel]

4. Diebold insider alleges company plagued by technical woes, Diebold defends 'sterling' record

Diebold consultant convicted for embezzlement

The Diebold insider noted that the initial GEMS system used to tabulate votes for the Diebold Opti-scan systems was designed by Jeffrey Dean, who was convicted in the early 1990s of computer-aided embezzlement. Dean was hired by Global Election Systems, which Diebold acquired in 2000.

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Diebold_insider__alleges_company_plagued_1206.html

[rumpel]

5. The Hidden Underbelly of Election Engineering

- Why We Cannot Entrust Our Sacred Republic to Automated Elections

Interesting Facts About Firmware

Four key properties of firmware, commonly in use in America's and overseas elections and recently approved for statewide deployment in New Hampshire. Each property is confirmed as "TRUE" by a number of technical experts.:
· Firmware is "flashable." Modem firmware is often stored in updateable 'flash' memory, rather than requiring chip exchange.

· If there's a remote interface, firmware can be updated by remote and such an interface can be a wireless receiver inside a case, and we wouldn't see it. Simply putting a scanner around it would ensure no telltale signals that might arouse suspicion.

snip

We understand that LHS Associates, New England’s exclusive “independent” voting machine sales and service vendor for Diebold and ES&S equipment, long advised New Hampshire that we were using software v. 1.92 T (an early “non-GEMS, pre-GEMS”) test version of the Diebold software, and that we have, therefore, not been using firmware (v. 1.94 W and above) in our automated elections. Thus, we in New Hampshire were advised that we have been safe from any concerns over “central tabulation” and the controversial Diebold GEMS software source code (now known to involve flashable firmware). The matter of firmware’s involvement in New Hampshire’s elections, however, has not in fact been clear, and now, firmware is openly proposed for all of New Hampshire.

· LHS Associates, overseen by Owner/CEO, John Silvestro (a long-time associate of Senior Vice President of Diebold Election Systems, Jeffrey Dean, convicted felon and designer of the controversial Diebold GEMS software compiler code and source code)*, has long been entrusted with the pre-programming, configuration and maintenance of the memory cards and voting machines of five New England States, including both Diebold and ES&S optical scanners in New Hampshire. LHS typically pre-programs the voting machine memory cards on site at its location in Methuen, Massachusetts, absent oversight, and delivers them directly to client communities, throughout New England, for a fee of approximately $500 - $700 per client community, per election period.

· Coincidentally, LHS Associates is also in the business of census demographic data collection for sizeable geographic areas of New England.

· Voting machine software and memory cards provided by private vendors, such as Diebold and ES&S, are regarded as “proprietary.” Thus, even election supervisors are not permitted to closely inspect the memory cards and voting machines widely in use throughout America. As such, it is unknown as to what precisely, is being programmed on the memory cards and voting machines in use in New England, which election officials have long dutifully employed in their elections, in accordance with instructions issued by LHS.

and other comments
By EarthAngelsNtwk at 05/16/2006 - 2:49pm
http://www.democracyfornewhampshire.com/node/view/2420

[Peace Patriot]

6. Here is the gist of this very alarming report about Diebold shill Connie's McCormack's

autocratic control of 4 million votes (Los Angeles County). All the technical gobble-de-gook (above) that election "experts" like McCormack throw at the public, to intimidate voters and retain secret control of vote counting, boils down to this: Connie McCormack (who does sales brochures for Diebold, and whose best friend is the former chief salesperson for Diebold in California) has turned Los Angeles elections over to a subsidiary of Diebold, a corporation with very close ties to the Bush regime, who will be "counting" all Los Angeles votes with "TRADE SECRET, PROPRIETARY programming code.

The document is dated January 30, 2007*. The person providing the comment above, which I presume is Rumpel, states:

"This contract extending now for 5 years with this wholly owned subsidiary of Diebold (DIMS), is a done deal.

"No matter what legislation is introduced, a private vendor controls our entire election system. The so called safe guards at every point is a waste of breath and effort. The only guardian to oversee the technology in this case of Los Angeles County is in the hands of one person at the County Project Director."

"McCormack now has the authority to extend the contract at her or her designates sole discretion. (previously having to seek approval from the Board)."

---------

" (Title of the McCormack democracy-destroying document for Los Angeles County: "Approve Sole Source Agreement with Data Information Management Systems (DIMS) for Continuation of Existing System Maintenance and Support Services of The County's Voter Information Management System")

---------

"DIMS," indeed. With this piece of corrupt crap, our democracy dims again, on its way to its final Corporate Reich blackout. The dim bulb in the White House should be glad. McCormack and a gang of mostly Republican county registrars are the ones who led to the fight to get rid of former CA Sec of State, Kevin Shelley, for doing his job of protecting California voters from the likes of McCormack. Shelley sued Diebold for their lies about the security of their machines, demanded to see their source code, and provided Californians with a paper ballot option, prior to the 2004 election. For this, he was stripped of his office, on entirely bogus corruption charges--because he was incorruptible. At one point, McCormack told a legislative committee she wanted to bulldoze the Sec of State's office to get her blood money for Diebold. (Shelley was withholding it, pending security tests of Diebold machines.) It's the ugliest event I have ever seen in California politics. The new CA Dem legislative leadership failed to defend Shelley, and strongarmed others into silence, while some of the Dems hid under their desks. With 3 to 2, and 2 to 1, majorities in the legislature, they let a CA official be "swift-boated" out of office, and then voted for a Schwarzenegger Republican appointee, and Diebold shill, to that office, who immediately started to undo all of Shelley's reforms. (Shelley was elected by the voters in 2002, pre-Diebold.)

The story does not end too badly. Schwarzenegger's appointee lost the election in 2006, and Democrat Debra Bowen, an election reformer, won, in what was otherwise a Schwarzenegger landslide (except for Jerry Brown, who won AG). Bowen's election was due to an awesome grass roots election reform movement in California. The word got around. The voters outvoted the machines. We also had a voter revolt in California, as about half the state voted by Absentee Ballot, in an effort to get around the rigged electronics.

McCormack needs to be FIRED!

[rumpel]

8. I don't know what posessed the County

officials and supervisors to sign off on this...


5. TERM
5.1 The "Initial Term" of this Agreement shall be effective February 10, 2007 or
upon approval by County's Board of Supervisors, whichever is later, and will run for five (5) consecutive years, unless sooner terminated or
extended, in whole or in part, as provided in this Agreement.

5.2. County authorizes the Registrar, or her designee, to exercise at her sole
discretion, upon notice to Contractor, the option to extend this Agreement
up to three (3) additional one-year periods ("Extension Year").

5.3. As used herein and except where expressly stated to the contrary, the
"Term" shall mean the Initial Term, and if extended, each Extension Year
("Option Term"), as the case may be.

5.4. County further authorizes Registrar, or her designee, at her discretion, to
authorize month-to-month extensions for a period not to exceed six (6)
months, at the end of the Initial Term or each Extension Year, if exercised.
Contractor agrees that such extension(s) shall be at the same rate(s),
terms and conditions.

and in her correspondence she refers to "RR/CC has determined" she has in fact brought in as deputy registrars

IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT YOUR BOARD:
Approve reimbursement for reasonable actual costs of relocating the families and
personal residences of Dean C. Logan and Tim McNamara who have been selected in
the executive positions of Chief Deputy and Assistant Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk.
This reimbursement is limited to the services of a commercial moving company
necessary one-way travel expenses for themselves and their families to the Los
Angeles County area, not to exceed the limits specified in Section 5.40.060 of the Los
Angeles County Code; actual relocation consultant costs if necessary; and temporary
housing rental costs up to a total of $7,000 each.

on Logan
http://www.soundpolitics.com/archives/004243.html

on McNamara
http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/62/20983

on the so called Project Director, presumably Michael Petrucello ( listed in document now as Project Director) at the Registrar's office itself.

10. On June 2, we were told (and surprised) by Michael Petrucello, Assistant ROV, Chief of Information Technology for the L.A. County ROV, that these Dell computers did not contain (and never did contain) any software other than their operating system, and were not connected to the network used for vote tabulation (the token ring network). We opened one scanning station cabinet and found the Dell computer on the next shelf below the old PC computer (which runs under DOS 6 - we were told). While no communication cables were attached to the back of the Dell computer, a power cord was attached and could have been plugged into the adjacent power strip in seconds. Communication cables now attached to the old PC computer could be quickly moved to the Dell. These changes would not be visible unless the cabinet were opened and the shelf pulled out. The contents of these cabinets cannot be viewed from the hallway observation station provided for citizens to view the election tabulating process.

http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1348&Itemid=51


on edit: corrected OCR misread of pdf doc.

on 2nd edit: WOW look what I found!
e-mail communication between Petrucelli and Diebold! I checked dieboldes.com it is part of their site.
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~matth/lists/rcr.w3archive/200209/msg00010.html

[rumpel]

10. p.s. interesting...

tons of .edu sites with communications.
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~matth/lists/support.w3archive/200011/index.html
http://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/~ping/diebold/salestalk.2000.html
google Steve Knecht = Global Election Systems/Diebold sales

After reading the communication my impression - it is clear that no one is in fact qualified to check programming code at the RR/CC to certify anything!

btw the LA County Chief Info Officer who was so impressed with the RR after the primaries. This letter almost sounds like a
fan letter from a groupie - where are the actual computer techs advising the Supervisors?

http://www.openvotingconsortium.org/ad/la-cio-666-report.pdf
http://www.input.com/events/state_breakfast/fullinwider_0604/fullinwider_0604_bio.cfm

[autorank]

11. rumple, This is amazing.

What's wrong with the Board of Supervisors out there? ARe they nuts. This works against them since it creates a ripe environment for fraud and the fraud lately has been against the Democrats.

This is just like Cuyahoga County...Democratic Board of Supervisors accommodates right wing vendors.

[rumpel]

12. I don't know

whether any public hearings occured either - I have to check -

My precinct head, was so upset in November about the RR - he said they never listen to anything - and he is a (R) as I recall. All I can hope is that Ms Bowen brings down the axe.

:)

[kster]

9. ‘Paper’ tigers issue warnings - Greens lead fight to scrap electronic voting machines

Thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3132283



Forget electronic voting.

That’s what the New York Green Party wants the state to do, opting instead for old-fashioned paper ballots.

Braving a chill wind that created real feel temperatures in the zero range, and bundled in hats and gloves, members of the Brooklyn Greens took to Cadman Plaza, right behind Borough Hall, to make the case for their preference.

“We are calling for voter marked paper ballots that get counted by hand,” said Colby Hamilton, the presiding officer of the Green Party of Brooklyn. He said that many countries, including Canada, use paper ballots, and have results of elections within 24 hours.


http://www.brooklynheightscourier.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17894573&BRD=2384&PAG=461&dept_id=560113&rfi=6