I have been contacted by the SOE' Peg Reese and was provided a document dated March 15, 2012 from Dominion Voting concerning questions I have raised with you.
The document indicates that one machine, as Commissioner Sharpe said in January, was responsible.
However the company noted that it would have been better for the staff to use a number of machines rather than one, in downloading vote counting software to the memory cards.
This solidifies the assertions I made during the March 8, 2012 meeting that it is your duty to demand that the Division of Elections investigate the election of Nov. 2, 2010 as conducted in Hillsborough County.
I urge you to thoughtfully consider the odds against the following series of events all taking place resulting in the "rescanning" of 38,000 ballots.
Only one machine ( the defective one) was selected and used in downloading the software to capture those votes out of as many as 5 available machines.
The 12 failing memory cards were sent out to early voting places in locations I have mentioned repeatedly, and are largely democratic. A resultant repeat of the 2008 "glitch" but for a different technical reasons.
No test of these cards was apparently made to assure they functioned properly either prior to sending them out, or during a test of the OSX machines at those locations.
I remind the commissioners the county SOE has taken considerable time in providing ANY documentation with regard to good faith questions I have posed regarding this election. The SOE's top three officers made false statements to me regarding the times and context of this election malfunction.
While the commission was well aware of problems associated with the machine, as evidenced by Commissioner Sharpe's statement to press on Nov. 4, 2010, and Jan. 5, 2011, the commission is essentially mum thereafter and hasn't concerned itself despite mounting evidence that either million dollar machines used to collect the vote don't work, or that there may be election tampering either from the vendor's end or at the SOE office.
The commissioners refrained from taking part in or signing off on the elections as members of the canvassing board, as evidence by the document I presented to you, dated Nov. 14, 2010. This could indicate the commission didn't want to be associated with the election for reasons mentioned.
You have the ability to adopt a joint resolution on your next regular meeting, to send off to the Division of Elections asking them to investigate this strange election. This would certainly carry more weight than the petition from a member of the public who - it can be argued - continues to do the job of vigilance and oversight for the commissioners themselves.
If you fail to even discuss this issue at your next meeting you are making glaringly evident your willful blindness to a very serious concern which is well documented now.