Entries in Marilyn Marks (5)
Michigan's Ballots are Pubilc Documents---why not Aspen's?
Tuesday, May 18, 2010 at 9:03PM The Michigan Attorney General today handed down an opinion confirming that voted ballots in Michigan are public documents.
If Michigan citizens can look at their ballots? Minnesotans' theirs, Floridians theirs, why not Aspen?
If Longmont, Colorado citizens can be involved in post elections using real ballots why are Aspen's ballots secret?
If El Paso County (Colorado Springs) can have extensive citizen post election audits, why do Aspen's ballots have to be hidden away from all but the city officials?
See a full explanation from the Michigan AG's opinion, demonstrating that ballots are to be non-traceable to the voter. The same facts and logic should apply here.
http://www.glassballotbox.org/storage/MichiganCase.pdf
Complaints Filed With Aspen Election Commission May 5, 2010
Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 10:45AM At least three complaints were filed with Aspen's Election Commission on May 5.
A letter report which will be supplemented was filed by Harvie Branscomb:
http://aspenelectionreview.blogspot.com/2010/05/harvie-branscombs-letter-of-complaint.html
Mycomplaint was filed as linked below:
http://www.glassballotbox.org/storage/MarksECDocument5.10.pdf
Status of Aspen IRV--Up for Repeal in November
Monday, May 10, 2010 at 8:51AM Status of Aspen’s IRV Method—--Up for Potential Repeal in November Election after November 09 Advisory Vote to Discontinue IRV.
In Aspen, the election season is gearing up again for August primaries and November elections for our County, State and Federal offices. Voters are beginning to inquire about the candidates and the issues on the ballot. The IRV status is one confusing element which needs to be updated.
Marks vs Koch--Motion for Reconsideration (Filed 3.24.10)
Wednesday, March 24, 2010 at 6:21PM The linked document was filed today with the Court to request that the court reconsider the dismissal.
The reasoning is self-explanatory.