Hi All,
I am advised that the ballots were examined by my opponent, with independent witnesses in the room.
He is reported as having stated that he is "satisfied" with the results of this examination.
Let us hope that this last minute attempt to subvert the results of our election will indeed be the end of the strife engendered by this conflict; and that we may get on with business of the Village..
Dave Israel
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Those ballots should be impounded and placed somewhere safe. How dare GL allow your opponent to examine the ballots without you or your representative there. These people are lower than dung, beware of the other shoe falling.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHow dare, Mr. Lowenstein and Mr. Gladstone question the integrity of the people who ran the election and the volunteers that counted. The ballots were counted FIVE times, not enough. Now they have been counted SIX times, will that be enough!
ReplyDeleteLets hope that you are right and that we can get on with running our Village the way it should be (and should have been) run all along.
ReplyDeleteThe candidates have every right to be present and watch when the votes are tallied. The only thing they are not permitted to do is participate in counting them.
ReplyDeleteIf there was a committee in place at the time election results were counted, recounting should have been unnecessary. There should have been a caller and a person to verify the call, two persons checking off the names called with two persons watching, and two persons to verify the count. No more than 25 ballots should have been called at a time and the count verified after each 25 votes are counted. This gives a more accurate vote and no need to count again and again to come up with a winner.
Asking for a recount when a vote is so close is not questioning the integrity of the election volunteers, so GL was within his rights to ask for re-examination, but in the presence of the candidates and counting committee. However, If ballots needed to be counted five or six times, it would appear that the committee did not operate efficiently when the count began.
As an objective bystander, I question the words "election fraud" and am appalled by the reference to "dung" when referring to anyone, regardless of what a person may think. And why may the president not "dare" as it was put? He did nothing punishable by death, even if there are those who do not agree with his action. It turns out that the result was accurate after all.
Perhaps President David Israel will have a more rational and convenient election process next time--not the silly 8-9 am bus schedule driven one we've been suffering with the past couple of years.
ReplyDeleteRuth, get a grip.
ReplyDeleteMike, no comment. You're a real class act.
ReplyDeleteRuthphild,
ReplyDeleteYes, You are right the President has the right to have a recount and he did two of them on Friday.
are you telling me two recounts are not sufficient. A sixth was necessary?? I believe any one who lost within two votes would
DEFINITELY ask for a recount. Do you think it was fair to have ONLY the loser in the room and not the winner to observe the recount?
After six times you are questioning INTEGRITY
Hi Plcruise,
ReplyDeleteMarch 11, 2010 3:19 PM,
Yes, it is already in train.
We will negotiate with Susan Bucher, the Supervisor of Elections in Palm Beach County, to obtain the use of voting machines and to have the Elections Board run the election, including counting the votes; and sequestering the ballots.
When the plan is ready, and the costs known, it will go thru regular channels to the Delegate Assembly for approval.
Dave Israel
From the desk of Peter Amato
ReplyDeletegreat idea David
Barbara C
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your comments.
I don't believe I said that so many recounts were necessary, but under the circumstances, yes, all interested parties should have been present -- even at the original count, if they wished to leave the meeting to observe the counting of ballots.
Had everyone interested been present at the recount, I think one would have been sufficient to prove that the results were accurate. I don't question anyone's integrity. I don't think it's a healthy thing to cast aspersions. It only leads to more unrest, especially in view of other current issues in the Village.
I'm rather schocked the original
ReplyDeletecount, after 6 re-counts, is now
OFFICIAL..Have the individuals who
requested and sanctioned this last
recount finally accepted the fact
that David Israel, will now become
President? The arrogance displayed
by all who were involved with ORCHESTRATING THIS 6TH RECOUNT,
WITHOUT PUBLIC NOTIFICATION,
INCLUSION OF ORIGINAL DECLARED
WINNER OF THE ELECTION, ANY VP'S
OR INTERESTED INDIVIDUALS, AS
OBSERVERS, IS AN OUTRAGE!
SHAME ON ALL OF YOU!