Mr. Gideon- The people of San Mateo County do not agree with your glowing assessment of Mr. Slocum- We are not fooled by his backpeddling into thinking he is an official with integrity. If he was,he would not have taken San Mateo from the "Gold Standard" to the " sold standard " - Slocum played a great " let me take you for a cup of coffee" shell game on the citizens thaat should not be forgotten.- Wallace Mckenzie

Mr. Mckenzie,
Thank you. I knew I would get slammed for this blog and that's alright. I agree that the decision to bring in Hart eSlates was a disaster and that Slocum should be held responsible for that decision.
However, with that said, if Linda Lamone in Maryland had instructed people in her state not to use the e-poll books because they were brand new to the state and people weren't ready to use them, the primary would have been freer of error.
If Cuyahoga Co. had held off for another election until everyone was trained properly, they would not have had as many problems in their primary.
The same goes for too many states.
It's good to see that someone recognizes that and decides not to fall into the trap of using the equipment just because we have it.
Thank you for your opinion and I agree with you.

Though I would not descriibe Warren Slocum quite so harshly as Brent does in his comments, it is true that Slocum's decision was an abrupt reversal of position(AKA broken pomise)that came with very little public notice and left activists scrambling to respond before it was acted upon by the Board of Supervisors.

He had previously said he would not abandon optical scan machines for insecure electronics. And then he did just that. And after our Raging Granny rally in February to thank him for his work up to that date, no less. Instead of an October surprise we had a September surprise.

He and the Supervisors signed on to the purchase agreement with Hart despite the warnings of a room full of activists and eloquent computer scientists.Not one computer scientist spoke in favor of the deal.

Aside from security issues. speakers also pointed out important loopholes in the contract with Hart, which Slocum and the Supervisors also ignored. Pretty shabby and it does indeed lead one to question motives.

However, Slocum does care enough about his reputation that he did act to prevent imminent election-day gridlock. After attending the first four-hour pollworker training I came away very pessimistic about the chances for things to go well. I guess other did, too.

It is galling that this small though appropriate fix comes after steamrollering the acquisition of the equipment in question and is, of course, not a long term solution. It is rather cold comfort to know that we have avoided a meltdown this November.

Gail Sredanovi
Raging Grannies Action League

{Ed Note: Post deleted. Disinformation. "Mort," while you are welcome to use an alias here, you are not welcome to offer disinformation about who you are and what your agenda is here. Consider this a warning, and that I'm being very kind in not naming who you are. Suffice to say, knock it off. Misleading folks is no better when done by someone on "our side" than it is when it's done by Voting Machine Companies or "bad guy" Election Officials. That is one of the (very few) rules for commenting here at BRAD BLOG. Thank you. And you're welcome. --- BF}