3. On April 8, Dennis Leone posed the following questions to STRS, which
have not been answered as of this writing:
From: Dennis Leone [mailto:dennisleone@roadrunner.com]
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2013 7:42 PM
To: 'Treneff, Nick'; 'Nadine McIlwain'; 'McGreevy, James'; 'Stein,
Bob' Cc: 'Board'; 'Nehf, Mike'; 'Neville, Bill'
Subject: Retirement Board Election
The basic questions that need to be answered are these:
1. Why does the official ballot language say “Select Two Candidates.”
The attached statement does not address this satisfactorily. How did this
happen? The wording certainly does not appear to be accidental.
2. Did the STRS Board approve the ballot language in advance?
3. Does STRS not care that huge numbers of retirees assumed -- by the
“Select Two Candidates” command -- that they needed to vote for 2 people in
order for their ballot to be valid. In other words, many made a second
selection because they wanted their first selection to be valid. Do you not
believe this?
4. If placing an “X” in the box is okay, why did the instructions state
that the entire box needed to filled in?
5. Why did the ballot instructions twice say “Check the name of the
candidates of your choice” instead of “Check the name of the candidate(s) of
your choice.”
6. The ballot instructions say “For election customer service, call
toll-free 1-800-218-4026.” When I called the board-hired company today, the
supervisor who could answer the above questions refused to talk with me. Why
were retirees invited to call customer service, then not given any answers? The
person answering the phone there today promised me I would receive a return call
from the supervisor TODAY. I did not.
Damon Asbury admitted the truth in 2004 when he said publicly: “The STRS
Board and the STRS Staff have lost touch with the membership.” You have done
the same in 2013 with an election that has many flaws………and I am not hearing one
single admission on the part of the board or the staff that the process should
have been better. Have can you possibly conclude that it was okay for the
official ballot language read “Select Two Candidates?”
Please answer my 6 questions above.
Dennis Leone
The text of the "attached statement" (from STRS, unsigned, sent out by Nick
Treneff) to which Dr. Leone refers:
[Unsigned memo on STRS letterhead]
April 8, 2013
TO: Candidates for the 2013 State Teachers Retirement Board Election
We are writing in response to concerns raised by wording on the voting
materials that were mailed to eligible voters last week. All ballots mailed out
included the same set of clear instructions that voters may cast their vote for
up to two candidates. Paper, phone and Internet ballots that only contain one
vote will be accepted, as well as those ballots that contain votes for two
candidates.
VR Election Services, the vendor hired by STRS Ohio to administer the
election, has confirmed that paper ballots completed and returned by mail are
scanned and then are visually inspected two times to ensure that votes are
correctly tabulated. Ballots that show the clear intent of the voter, including
those with boxes marked with an “X” or a check mark, will be counted.
STRS Ohio believes the voting materials provided to retirees for this
election are clear and correct as presented and that retirees’ votes will be
accurately recorded.
4. Why does the memo (above) say "All ballots mailed out included the same
set of clear instructions that voters may cast their vote for up to two
candidates"? This is absurd! Clear to whom? To those who do not understand what
a COMMAND ("Select two candidates") is? I would suggest STRS and VRES consult
some experts on the English language, and perhaps an attorney or two, on that
one.
5. The very last statement in the memo is particularly interesting. "clear
and correct as presented". Clear and correct to WHOM? Obviously they're "clear
and correct" to STRS Ohio and VR Election Services, but not to all the voters.
Nobody at STRS or VRES is voting, so they don't have the same interest we do in
this election. They either don't realize or don't care about the outcome of this
election (or perhaps there's another agenda somewhere which we haven't figured
out yet), which, if allowed to go on, WILL affect the outcome.
6. Is this the first time STRS board election irregularities have been
pointed out to STRS? Absolutely not. Jim Stoll, active teacher member, noticed
some flaws four years ago and brought it to STRS' attention. He was told by Mike
Nehf, Executive Director, that "I'll be following up on the questions you have
presented." Fast forward to April 2013: Nothing's changed! That's leadership?
Jim Stoll to Mike Nehf, April 13, 2009
Subject: STRS Election Ballots
Dear Mr. Nehf,
I just spoke with Laura Ecklar, Director of Communications regarding the
Election Ballots which were sent out via VR Election Services.
The conversation did not go well. In my opinion Ms. Ecklar did not listen
nor hear my concerns so I am addressing them with you directly.
It has been brought to my attention by both Active and Retired STRS members
that the instructions on the Ballot clearly states and I quote, "Mark your
selection by completely filling in the box with black ink or pencil located next
to the name of the candidate you choose on the ballot below."
However, as I'm sure you are aware, as I'm told that correspondence was
sent to both you and Ms. Ecklar, the envelope, which you put the ballot in, has
a box with an simple "x" on the back, inside the box, which I'm told by STRS
members was very confusing.
In my conversation with Ms. Ecklar she told me that "each ballot is counted
by hand" so that ALL the ballots will be counted no matter how they are marked?"
A couple of things from my perspective:
1) Is it legal to defy the specific election ballot instructions?
2) It is confusing and I would just like confirmation from you as Exec.
Director whether votes will be counted if there is an "X" in the box, a "check"
in the box, any other marks that would be counted, and/or if it must be
completely filled in as the instructions specify.
Lastly, I find it unacceptable that this question or discrepancy was
brought to your attention or Ms. Ecklar's attention, and there was no
communication as to the resolution of these questions with the 6 candidates
involved. At least there was no communication with me. I would have thought
that STRS would have communicated with all the candidates and assured them that
an issue had been brought to the attention of STRS regarding the Election and
that it had been addressed and this is the resolution.
Looking forward to hearing from you directly on what the resolution to the
above questions will be.
James A. Stoll
Director of Athletics
Sycamore H.S.
7400 Cornell Rd.
Cincinnati, Ohio 45242
Jim Stoll to Mike Nehf, April 14, 2009
Subject: RE: STRS Election Ballots
Dear Mr. Nehf,
For everyone's reference I have attached the voting instruction sheet as
well as a scan of the envelope.
I hope everyone is in agreement that the instructions are clearly
contradictory in the written statement that the box must be filled in
COMPLETELY and on the ballot itself instructions show "RIGHT" (showing box
filled in completely) and "WRONG" (with a check, "x" , and dot, in the box.
Yet, Ms Ecklar has advised that any mark will be counted?
Additionally, you'll see the outside envelope also has a X in boxes on the
outside.
VR Elections Services has in my opinion done an extremely poor job here.
One would have thought after recent federal election disputes that this type of
thing would have been eliminated.
My goal here is that all six candidates receive fair consideration of votes
cast. Clarification to those candidates and members is certainly in order.
Respectfully,
James A. Stoll
Mike Nehf to Jim Stoll, April 14, 2009
Subject: RE: STRS Election Ballots
Dear Mr. Stoll,
Thank you for your e-mail communication. I’ll be following up on the
questions you have presented.
Sincerely,
Mike Nehf
To quote Jim Stoll regarding the 2013 election, ".....this issue was
brought up four years ago in 2009 election and Mr. Nehf assured he'd follow up
on these election concerns. Poor leadership .... Nothing has changed and
unfairness abounds. Can you spell incompetence!!!"
For the record, many retirees are still concerned about the necessity of
filling in the little box(es) in front of the candidate's/candidates' name(s). A
very small thing to VR Elections Services, but a hassle to many voters. A box is
a perfect design for an "X", but to fill it in, one is likely to end up with a
lot of messy back-and-forth scratch marks. If VRES wants it filled in, why don't
they provide little circles or ovals, which are MUCH easier to fill in? A small
thing, using boxes, perhaps, but a sure sign of stupidity on somebody's part!
Out of lifelong experience, many voters will see the boxes and automatically use
an "X". Or probably TWO "X's" since they fear their ballot will be invalidated
if they do not "SELECT TWO CANDIDATES". Same thing
filling in the boxes: "Gee, I'd better vote for TWO candidates, even
though I was planning to vote for only ONE, because I don't want my
ballot to be tossed out for not following directions!!"
Florida, move over with your hanging chads. Here comes STRS Ohio!!
STRS: Do the RIGHT thing and the INTELLIGENT thing: THROW OUT THIS
ELECTION AND START OVER, AND SEE IF YOU CAN DO IT RIGHT THIS
TIME!!!
Kathie Bracy, Retiree
STRS Ohio member since 1965
