| Mr. Mayor, Mr. Auditor, and City Council members:
I have been involved with the "nitty gritty" of Denver elections in one capacity or another for about a dozen years or so, and I would ask you consider the following points as we are rapidly moving towards changing, probably irrevocably, a 100-year-old city institution.
1. None of the problems on Nov. 7th would have avoided by a different form of governance of the election process. The breakdowns were managerial and technical. The only suggested change that might, and only might, have made a difference is an elected Director of Elections. The only reason I say it might have made a difference is the person who was in charge of the managerial functions would have been more responsible directly to the voters and MIGHT have made different decisions accordingly.
2. Denver is unique among Colorado counties in the way we do elections. Other counties' elections are run by a County Clerk who runs elections as a small portion of his/her overall job. They also have to only run 2 elections every other year: the primary and general in even-numbered years. County Clerks do not run municipal elections outside of Denver, that is done by the municipality's city clerk. In Denver we have two elections every year: odd years are in May and Nov. and even years are in Aug. and Nov. So we are always no more than 8 months from the next election. And even this is assuming thre will be no special elections like the one that is currently underconsideration for Jan. Denver needs an elected official (or two) whose specific job it is to run elections; not a Clerk who only has this as a small part of his/her overall duties.
3. Under a County Clerk, the running of elections will still be in the hands of nonelected staff members. There is no way a County Clerk can take full responsibility for the running of elections when he/she has so many other duties. The clerk will have to rely on an appointed Director, just as the Commission currently does. The diffrence is there will only be one set of eyes on the Director, not three.
4. Poltical reality. If an issue must go forward, there will be a lot of resistance to an elected County Clerk. Every group I have spoken with, or listened to, since election day (and there have been dozens) seems to be of an opinion that an elected County Clerk not only solves nothing, but may actually create more problems. However, the idea of having one elected person responsible for nothing but the elections is far more appealing. Not only does it appeal to the people who want structural change, but it is tolerable to those who do not.
Therefore I would recommend all of the interested parties should converge and get behind one proposal: That of an elected Director of Elections, as proposed by Councilwoman Marcia Johnson. If a change must be made, this is the most logical; most practical; and politically, the most sellable.
Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue.
Dan Willis
|
RSS Feed
