King County is consistently misinterpreting the state voter intent manual

[BWdem4life]

Below is the text of an email I just sent to the union representing King County workers:

I don't know if there's anything the union can do about this situation since I am (was) a temporary worker and cannot prove anything. I just wanted to let you know what I believe happened, and get your opinion.

I was placed in ballot review/scan. I believe I did a good job -- attendance was good, got along with co-workers and management, did competent work wherever I was placed.

I understand that there is no guarantee of employment as a temporary worker - yet, I had heard that this primary election would be busy and I've worked less busy elections. So, the decision not to offer me a position came as a surprise. It made me think back on things that might have caused it, and I can only pinpoint a single thing: My insistence that King County is misinterpreting the State Voter Intent Manual with regard to overvotes.

This is a very big deal in my opinion and something that could come back to haunt King County if it is not remedied. I know I am not alone in my belief that many valid votes are being tagged as overvotes, and that the procedure in place ( "over ¼ of a bubble is a vote" ) is not consistent with the spirit of the Washington State Voter Intent Manual.

https://www.sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/administrators/2018_voter-intent_web.pdf

Specifically, on page 15, two examples are shown of a voter beginning to vote for one candidate and then changing their mind and completely blacking in a bubble for a different candidate. The manual makes clear that this is NOT an overvote. Then on page 51 there is a single example of an overvote where most of one bubble is filled in, as well as a complete second bubble. There is not a clear choice made and this is an overvote.

In case after case, King County has been making the decision that when a voter begins to fill in a bubble from the center as opposed to a corner, this should be treated differently than the case on page 15. In case after case, even though there is really no way to truly discern what ¼ of a bubble really means, even in fact in cases where the machine originally COUNTS something as a vote and not an overvote, King County employees are being forced to reverse this and declare something an overvote even though as per page 15 there is a clear vote for one candidate - i.e., one bubble is completely darkened and the other bubble is considerably less darkened.

I have constantly objected to this. I reached out to Julie Wise at one point, and the result was a meeting between the STT's and Jonathan Keith, which changed nothing.

Since I don't believe I have done anything else which could have resulted in my not being selected for elections work, I must conclude that this is retribution for my unwillingness to accept what I believe to be a serious systemic problem with regard to voter intent interpretation.

I am considering further action including speaking out to the press, but thought I would first start with the Union.

Thoughts, anyone? Should I continue to pursue this or let it drop?

[RainCaster]

1. Let it go- it was a job, not a career

It is a very small part of the world that cares about this. Probly less than a quarter bubble.
Keep looking for something more interesting.