So if nobody objects I'm going to call the meeting order.

Okay.

So the meeting is called to order.

Um it's 417.

Roll roll call, Commissioner Belcher.

Commissioner Butter.

Here.

Commissioner Henderson.

Here.

Commissioner Moore.

Commissioner Pham?

Here.

Commissioner Ramon?

Here.

Commissioner Seabrook.

Commissioner Varlick.

Present.

Commissioner Valentine.

Here.

Commissioner Wagner.

Commissioner Whitehurst.

Vice President Dieter?

Here.

President Lindsay?

Here.

And I guess you don't call roll for the ex officio commissioner.

Call a tie?

Oh, okay.

I just missed it.

Okay.

All right.

So we are starting late, but at least we're starting.

We have uh that was item one.

Uh item two, swearing in of no of new commissioners.

We don't have one at this meeting.

Item three, approval of agenda.

Does anybody want to make any changes to the agenda?

All right, hearing none, we'll move on to item four.

Approval of the minutes of September 2025.

I guess.

Um, so are there any changes to the minutes or corrections to the minutes of uh last month's meeting?

Could we get a motion to approve the minutes as written?

Uh moved by Commissioner Ramon, seconded by Commissioner Seabrook to approve the minutes as written.

Um we'll have to call the roll on every vote.

Commissioner Butter.

Aye.

Commissioner Henderson.

Aye.

Commissioner Ramon.

Aye.

Commissioner Sebrook.

Commissioner Varlick.

Okay.

Commissioner Valentine.

Vice President Dieter.

Aye.

President Lindsay.

Aye.

So the motion passes 80.

Yep.

Okay.

So now we have announcements and communications item five on the agenda.

So we'll start with staff and then see if commissioners have any announcements.

Cynthia?

So the announcements that we have.

Sorry, guys, is it too loud?

I tend to have a loud voice.

Sorry.

Okay.

So one of the announcements that we have of some of the things that we've implemented in the office that we wanted to make you all aware of.

And the first one is it was brought up by um I believe Commissioner Fam regarding filtering of election results on our website and how um their choices do not stay in place.

And we found out that they did not stay in place.

We thought, so we have our information technology department working on that.

So we hope to have that up and ready soon.

Okay.

And it'll be it'll be it'll change from resetting after one day to resetting after one week.

We believe one week.

Okay.

That's the goal.

Okay.

Okay.

And then the next is the ability to access C VR records ongoing.

So um, and these are the updates we believe that are coming as we provide updates to C VRs are um being provided, and we usually have just the most recent C VR listed for request.

So we're looking at keeping all of them to date.

Um we're just trying to figure out with the accessibility laws that are in place now that the county has to be one.

Well, well at least try to be 100% accessible by April, I believe, of next year.

Um so we're trying to work within that and see how we can do this at the same time.

Okay.

And also in terms of making enhancements to our observation area for just to enhance the whole observer experience.

So we've been looking at based on recommendations from the grand jury report, suggestions from the commissioners, and also the public.

So we're looking at what we can do to provide more information that's readily available.

So we're hoping maybe to implement some of that for this election, but we're still working on posting of procedures within each area and posting of observer guidelines within each area and possibly seeing how we can be maybe more accessible for questions to from the public.

And we're still trying to work that out.

Right now we have election attendants who are here present who are chaperoning our public coming to observe.

And they're able to notify the observers that if you do have any questions, someone will be available to you once you're done observing.

And we do make ourselves available.

We're just looking at that to see what we could do to enhance that experience.

That's what I have.

Thank you.

Do any commissioners have any announcements?

I just want.

Yeah, I think probably everybody feels that way.

I'll second it, but let's not force everybody else to say that too.

Um but um yeah, that that's some fast work responding to the issue uh that uh Ty brought up last time.

And John Guerrero, I think, um was one that the second bullet point.

Um is a partial isn't exactly what John wanted, but it's it was a step, it was as far as staff could go immediately.

Um so John, I don't know if you're listening or not, but you can now get hold of the election results as C VRs, the previous days or the previous, but uh it was a little much for them to make it.

It would have been a big website change uh for them to have done exactly what you asked, but they were able to kind of get there halfway.

Um, so um I don't have any uh any announcements either, strangely enough.

Um so we can go on to public comment.

How many folk do we have?

If you'd like to make a public comment on agendized items, please raise your hand now.

Okay, so three minutes each for those two people.

Laura Weisiger, you have three minutes.

Thank you for calling on me.

Um and I just was wanting to comment on agenda item 8B2.

I wanted to thank you all for addressing this matter today.

And um I did talk to the registrar's office about this and um trying to re-jog my memory on some history, and it did come about from clerks uh finding out that some cities were having like an exorbitant number of measures and others were having none, and they were all getting the same c consolidation charges.

However, I don't recall that registrar ever after that, you know, when they started implementing the above four measures getting uh charged double.

I don't remember that piece of it or um have a recollection.

I couldn't find it in any of my old meeting notes or anything.

And I just I have concern and would like to ask uh, you know, the registrar and the commission to kind of address this and think of it in a different way, because going from four measures to five measures is not that significant of a change, and four measures to eight measures, that's that's double, but you're not doubling all of the expenses.

We already get itemized bills from you know, some some translators from some of the printing costs, and they do itemize out each measure in those.

Yet the consolidation bill that comes from the registrar, that's the you know, set amount of between, you know, last time it was four dollars and sixty three or yeah, four sixty-three a voter.

That doubling that doesn't seem to make sense in my mind.

And um, I would just hope that maybe we can come up or you know, everybody can come up with a better solution uh and not double the charges because not everything doubles.

There is, you know, charges for like voting machine replacement costs.

Well, you're not doubly replacing the machines because you had five measures instead of six.

You're not um, you know, the storage fees for those, the the transport fees for all that equipment.

You're not doubling it because you have that many measures.

And that that is currently what is being done.

So I just I really appreciate everybody jumping on this and getting it on the agenda.

And I I really hope that there can be a better solution and that it can be more equitable in a way that maybe there can be incremental increases per measure and um or a way to you know filter out some of the costs that clearly shouldn't be doubled in my opinion.

Uh so thank you so much.

John Guerrero, you have three minutes.

Uh yeah, uh guess I am listening, so and I I agree it's not uh C VRs and uh you know the reporting is not exactly what I was looking for, but it's certainly a big step in the right direction.

Uh let me tell you why I'm I was so hot on this is that this current election, for example, there's in the election integrity groups are run in this this thing about you know the machines are rigged is going around again.

However, you know, I keep trying to point out to them the that in California we have we have this thing called a uh one percent manual telly.

And if you can get the C VRs, you know, just before the one percent manual telly, and if you know, you know, security systems are, you know, like they are here, you know, they they do very good job here.

That should put that to bed because you will be able to compare the C VRs before they do the one percent manually against the results of the Romps and Manu Telly and see that there were no changes.

And therefore you can check the machines and make sure that they aren't rigging the election.

So here in California, if we could get all the ROVs to issue the cash vote records just before the one percent manual telly, and I mean before you even, you know, select the one percent of the the votes or the balance that you're gonna get and give that to the uh to the public, and then go in and run your rump set manually, you know, very secure and very open.

That should put that conspiracy theory to bed that the machines are rigged.

I'm really trying to help you here.

I'm trying to put that together.

Sorry for me uh uh for for the interruption.

My second point, and I made this point uh at the board of Supervisors meeting is that the RLB's response uh to the grand jury, they were there was one part where they quoted this has to do with the logic and accuracy testing.

Uh the one part that they quote uh secretary of state's uh regulations two zero two seven nine.

Uh that that's the wrong regulation.

That regulation pertains not to the logic and accuracy tests that that actually is saying, you know, you gotta test out the the ballot printers, make sure the ballots you test on every you know, all the machines that they make they can read the ballot printing the ballots.

208 to 6, I believe, is the one that could uh governs the logic and accuracy test, and it says that you have to test in public all the machines, the the tabulators, you know, scanners as you want to call them.

Thank you.

Jim, we had one more hand raised virtually after public comments started.

Two minutes.

And you have uh two minutes.

Hi, um, this is Ann.

Um I'm just uh tagging on to earlier uh Lara's message.

Um, we're hoping that there are better communications between the ROV and the city clerks um in terms of whatever policies or decisions or any changes that are made that they are communicated in advance or you know, uh promptly with the city clerk, we would appreciate that.

Thank you.

Um, is that in regard to the uh cost issue that's on the agenda today?

Sorry, uh item 8b2.

Um I don't think it's a new thing though.

Um, I guess we could take it up under AP, why don't we take that up under AP2?

We'll just wait till we get there.

Um, thank you.

Okay.

Um so there's no other public comment.

Okay.

So we're done with um item six, and we're going on to item seven.

Uh Tim could not make it today.

So uh Cynthia is holding the fort.

Um, so the monthly update from the registrar's office uh review the content of mailers that were sent out from the November special November special, oh, for this November special election, um the different sections of it.

I guess uh maybe Irene, you can or would we could just let it happen, but the different sections in it and what's in there and like that, is that about correct, Irene?

Okay, all right, great.

So what I'd like to do is go over the mailings that we send out by the registrar voters to the voters to in different stages of the election, be able to communicate with them so they are ready and knowledgeable that there is an election, and then as we get through, um, or get to the point of issuing ballots and other materials that they already have a sense of it.

Um, before of course they get inundated with any other political materials at their home.

So, what I'll first show is our first communication, and this is a direct mailer.

Um, and if you're a voter of Alameda County, um you will you would have received this, and this is our are you vote ready?

This is letting voters know that there is an election, when it is, what it is, and then trying to remind them of different topics that they should be looking at now, their voter registration status.

Um, are they having a mailing address?

That's correct.

Do they want to take it off?

Because a lot of times voters don't realize that, or even sometimes a voter may have moved and maybe a roommate or someone that they're living with gets this and they don't, and they say, Why didn't I get it?

Well, because you have something going on, maybe with your voter registration information, and it alerts them to, hmm, check your status.

So we go into what the election is.

Um we talk about vote centers, how you can vote in person by mail, um, how to return your ballot.

We talk about checking your voter status and where you can check that online, either at the Secretary of State's office or on our website through my voter profile.

We talk about the voter information guide that will be coming to them and a time frame.

Um, when to expect their vote by mail ballot, um, and then we talk about bilingual ballots as well and language support, and then we talk about things to know where you can drop off your ballot at.

Um we have a program called AC vote on the go, which assists voters who are cannot get out of their home or are in a facility, and so we provide a service where you can make an appointment with our team of two and they actually go to you, and they will give you a replacement ballot, they will pick up your ballot, and you can put it in our official trolley.

So it's really an experience to help those voters that may be confined.

Um we talk about the military overseas voters, um, what that is and some deadlines for that, and we talk about voters where they may not be aware that their rights to vote are restored.

So we want to make sure that they're aware of that so they have time to take care of any of these items before a ballot goes out or their voter guide, and then we talk about um different services like ballot tracks, letting them know that they can sign up and subscribe to get notifications about their ballot was received, when it was um uh in a sense in essence counted, and the secretary of state sends lots of notifications out through ballot tracks as well.

We also have our language assistance lines on our mailer as well, so that's the first item that voters get, which is be vote ready.

You have a question, G?

Yeah.

Um, if a ballot arrives in a place where a renter has moved, um, can the ballot be forwarded?

So if the if the voter lets like it does a change of address, a national change of address, and uses that through the U.S.

postal system, we do get notified of that change, and then we can forward the ballot to them.

A lot of times if the voter is moved, the new occupants or even the landlord will let us know, and then at that point we can take action on the ballot.

But can you drop it back in the mail or the you can drop it back in the mail because they all come back to us regardless?

Okay, that's with the post office.

I had I had another question about um the voting centers used to be we had neighborhood polling places, and you could go there and uh they reported who had voted.

There's a list on the wall and says, Oh, so and so has voted, you know, and um, but now we have the voting centers.

Is that still available?

It still is available by request.

You can.

Yes, so for poll watchers.

So we do provide the service still where they'll get a listing of those that have voted.

How do they get that listing?

So Noah, do we have it posted at the vote center?

Yes.

Yeah.

So at each full center, there's a posting where they can go to our website and request it.

And they'll be sent an email where they can download a PDF, and it's a list of everyone that's voted throughout the county.

So it's not just at that vote center, it's everyone who's voted in person at a vote center countywide.

Is it timely during the during the election day?

That's updated daily and election day multiple times a day.

How many times?

Multiple times, almost every three hours, I think.

Oh wow, okay, okay, great.

Yeah.

Um, I'm just gonna say I used to be uh get out the vote volunteer quite commonly in one campaign or another.

Um, and you know, you would go to the precinct that you were assigned to and you would see so and so doesn't vote, and you go knock on the door and say, come on, you know, um, but it doesn't sound like you can do that, like by the time you requested, and by the time you get the thing, it's not just for your precinct, although people can vote anywhere now.

Um, but is it useful to people that are working on get out the vote for a campaign still?

I think it is useful because I think the response has been better for those, it's more timely, and um I think when we had polling locations, um, they really because they couldn't take the list with them, right?

Right.

They were writing down writing down names and and such.

So I think this is a more efficient way um to be able to know who's voted.

Um could you repeat that?

It's on the website.

Um, where on the website is it that you request that?

So it's all about so if you go to a vote center and go outside, this is the sign.

Oh, it's okay, a link outside the vote center.

Great, good to know.

Thank you.

Okay, so first mailer, be vote ready, and then we will have um and the timing of these are within the same time frame, actually.

You will get a voter information guide, and in this election, we have two ballot types: a ballot type one, which is for all voters within the county that does not have the special Washington Township measure on it.

So that's ballot type one, and the voter information guide is a wealth of information to voters on a lot of the same information that we put in our direct mailers and more.

Talks about measures if there's candidates, it gives you candidate statements, which are optional for candidates to publish, but it's a wealth of information, contact information for um the registrar voters and services.

Then at the same time, we have the ballot.

So you would have received your ballot package in the mail, the outer envelope, which is here, and this this is actually mine, and Irene, thank you for bringing all of your information too.

Mine does not have my ballot in it because I voted already.

And of course, the all important I voted sticker, um, the language assistant assistance card again with all the numbers of where to call if you need language assistance.

We have the inserts that talk about how to fold your ballot correctly in the envelope because that does make a difference on the thickness when we're processing it through the automated system.

Believe it or not, but it does.

It talks about how to make sure you sign your envelope, um, it talks about where to return your ballot in person, talks about ballot drop stops, it talks about AC vote on the go, how to look up our ballot drop box locations, um, just another wealth of knowledge for voters to be able to get that information as they're opening their ballot.

So, what we try to do is provide information initially, but keep providing it as they're going through their stages of voting, and it's just friendly reminders, and then of course, one thing I wanted to um talk about, and I just pulled one because I already voted.

One of the things that we did with our return envelope.

Most ROVs, their return envelopes are yellow, not in Alameda County.

We want it to stand out, so we do our branding of orange and blue.

We know there are ballot return envelopes.

Um, but as a suggestion that I received over the phone from a concerned voter, um, and her mom, uh, she called me during the November 2024 general, and she was wonderful.

She talked about her mother who was 100 years old and was voting and had problems finding where to sign.

So in April of this year, we were able to kind of pilot where we put on the return envelope a notification for voters on where to sign.

And at the timing, we couldn't get it exactly right, but for this election we did.

So we have a notice or a little reminder, voters sign here, do not print, and an arrow going to the signature line, and that's what she wanted.

She wanted that arrow, and we got it.

So we're really happy about that.

I'm really happy about that.

So I hope when she sees it, she knows it was based on her suggestion.

So we have those the state pamphlets.

So I want to make sure that everybody knows this is um published by the state and it's all propositions.

So the state sends those out and sends copies to all voters in the counties, and also provides the counties with supplemental copies.

And this is more about now.

This is as a voters have their ballot, perfect.

We want them to know, don't wait.

This was our new slogan this time.

Don't wait, vote now.

You'll see them on the billboards.

You'll see them in everything now.

And again, just letting voters know the important facts about where they can vote, how they can vote, the many ways they can vote, and their options, and what's important to the voters in terms of signing their envelope.

We have the new design on there, so we're proud to be able to get that on for this election, and then just again, reaffirming to the voters the things that they need to know.

Voters who may not know that their vote voting rights are restored, um, and how they can find out about that, and it's all about also not just to the voter who's registered in the house, but maybe it's someone that they know, and they read this and they say, Oh, this might apply to my friend or my brother, my sister, whoever.

And so it's an informational piece that we want voters to share.

And then the last item is this we're really proud of.

This is a large voter guide.

This is something that we were the first in the state to provide, and we've had this now.

I think for maybe maybe almost three election cycles come 2026, and it's an exact replica of the small, but a large print version that came about with one of our accessibility groups.

Um we got on a phone call with them.

This was one of the main things that they wanted to be able to pass out.

So a voter can request them.

We also um provide copies to our partners, so they have it.

Um, so we're really proud of this too.

That's what I have.

Oh, and the correction notice.

I wanted to make sure we had that.

Thank you, Irene, for bringing this.

So there was an error in the state pamphlet by the state.

I'm sure you all know about one of the redistricting congressional districts.

So the state did send out a correction notice, but not all voters received the incorrect information in their state pamphlet.

They were able to catch a number of them and correct it before they were printed and mailed.

So not everybody received one of these.

Okay.

Hi, uh, I had a question.

Is it all?

Okay, I had a question um pertaining to the um, what did you say, the AC vote uh on the go?

Um, does that program is for in-house, right?

Like they come to people's homes and or care facilities or those types of things?

They do.

Um, so do they also service like unhoused individuals in Alameda County?

So I don't know for sure if we've had any request from going to an location um by a voter who's unhoused, but I do know that we have serviced many um uh I would say almost like uh CBOs or such that might want or have someone that they know that could reach out to them.

So we go anywhere, quite honestly.

We are open to go anywhere.

So is it is there is a room for expansion in that in that current program?

Well, I will tell you it has expanded every election.

Specifically for that demographic that I'm asking.

Well, if we get a request, we will I'm requesting well I mean, if someone calls okay we will provide the service okay yeah thank you yeah I just have a question regarding precincts some precincts are open multiple weeks some precincts are are open for a shorter period how what's the criteria for for that so being a voters' choice act county the state regulates ratios by voters by transportation by areas um so in our county based on the voter population and um so for instance uh we do not have one million registered voters but when we joined the voters choice act we based all of our figures on one million registered voters we have over 900 and six um nine hundred and sixty thousand registered voters in our county and so but our numbers of vote centers and drop boxes are based on one million to allow some growth so if in our county we have um right now 20 vote centers that are open for eleven days and 18 that are open for four days um okay just saying that we're running late um because we started late and and um but are there any other questions or comments no I do have a question sorry June this is yeah thank you thanks for recognizing me my question was what was the incorrect information that the secretary accidentally sent out so in the state pamphlet um where it talks about the on a map it talks about the congressional districts that would be um redefined if Prop 50 passes there was one of the correct uh congressional districts that was named incorrectly so they did um correct that and sent out notices thank you uh if there are no other questions then let's go or questions or comments let's go on to uh item eight which is actionable items uh we start off with committees um so the first one is the voting participation committee um the lead of that committee is alyssa so do you have a report um yes we'll be we're working on to release something next month um here's sorry we're we're working to release something next month hopefully so it it looks like um we'll have something for you guys next month uh okay and uh nominations committee uh so uh we got access to larger pool of um uh uh available applicants now plus uh just before this meeting uh we were told by the ROV that there is one uh lack applicant uh and I'm gonna receive a PDF uh version of that resume and uh Commissioner Belcher just told me that she has a resume to send to us so if those end up being strong applicants then Carl and I will have an opportunity to meet and then present those to the commission at our next meeting.

Go ahead.

What are the requirements for the open position?

Right now we're not looking for any particular requirements for to fill Benita's seat that though we are looking for an impacted community um and we had a lengthy discussion in our first meeting about what that meant, and we can review that offline.

I don't want to belabor that topic now, but we can we can talk about you know what we're looking for in terms of what the impacted communities are, or if you have notes from that meeting, you can reference those in the commission yeah.

Uh it was one of our our first meeting.

Yeah.

But legally, it's um uh it's an impacted community seat, and that means that we're we're um we're responsible for recommending somebody to the board of supervisors for that seat.

Yeah, that's an hour discussion.

Um, so um yeah.

Yeah, yeah, so we we had a discussion about that if you remember at our very first meeting, um, and uh and so we have notes on that, and if you if you need a refresher, I can I can send that to you.

So that way, I don't want to take up more time than then we already have because we're already running behind.

Okay, that's okay, all right.

Thank you.

Um so that's are there any questions or comments regarding nominations?

Okay.

Um, so we can go on to new business.

So um 8B1 is review of third party contracts.

It's something I requested.

There's no there was a press piece that was a little snarky that I saw, but uh there's no agenda here or anything, it's just we're an oversight body, and I think it would be good to know what contracts we have and what do we get and what does it cost us, and like that.

It's just purely informational.

There's no um belief that they're wrong or anything like that.

Just want to learn.

That's what we're looking for here.

Um I have a question about contracts.

What's that?

I have a question about contracts.

Um yeah, let me just finish with the background.

So we got um uh the dominion contract.

So what it was a little too much under the conditions where they're running an election, they're right in the middle of the election.

Um, but what they were able to do is get us a copy of the Dominion contract and the uh 2010 MOU with the city clerks.

Um, and then other than that, um the possible action is request a full list of contracts be presented in writing to the commission after the November 2025 election.

Um Judy.

I just wonder it with the Dominion uh contract, is anybody concerned about the billionaires that just bought Dominion.

Um that is not I don't think that's related to this item.

Um maybe maybe you could claim it is.

Um that's pretty complicated, and I don't know what I'm allowed to say and what I'm not allowed to say.

I mean, I do know some stuff, but I don't know if I'm allowed to say it.

Not from the department, but from a third source.

Um I think bottom line, we really don't have anything to worry about.

So that's bottom line, but I can't explain it because I don't know if some of the stuff that I was told was confidential or not, and I don't want to break confidential out of by mistake.

Um, so but it's good it's kind of good news that that we probably don't have anything to worry about.

Good to know, yeah, yeah.

Yes.

I can talk a little bit about that.

Um the uh new owner uh with Liberty Vote had a meeting with ROVs this morning that I attended virtually and was reassuring all the counties and California, their customers, that um they would be putting out a new press release regarding um the press release that came out that may have um misrepresented some things in that.

So um we're working with the new owner and um we'll continue to have meetings and such, and then the Secretary of State was also on the call, and the Secretary of State's office also said that the current contract and the system is still valid that was not included in any way in the acquisition to change that currently.

Um eventually they can change maybe the parameters of what they're offering or whatever, sure.

Sure, if they want to lose contracts, they can screw around as much as they want.

I don't think they want to lose contracts, right?

I think what's important also is that you know they're working with the Secretary of State's office because they have to, and they're working with their clients because they have to.

And so I feel that they're being receptive to addressing concerns from the counties.

Um comments or suggestions on this item.

Uh Jim, this is Ty.

Oh, yes, thank you, Ty.

Go ahead.

I was just wondering if we are purvy to actually look at other costs that are also incurring um by uh other cities that we have to incur as um when we do the consolidated elections, such as like when we do it with the consolidated printers, or when we have to use uh translation services for all that.

I was just curious to know if that can be under the preview of the elections commission just to review the contract itself.

Which contract?

Uh consolidated printers is one of them.

That's the uh organiz uh that's the vendor that basically prints all the um mailing for uh for the Alameda County registrar of voters, and the other one is um all any and all translation companies that the ROV uses, such as the I think it was the Daily Journal, that is a Chinese newspaper, for example.

Um, on the last one, you're not saying the vendor is the the vendor is a newspaper?

I don't know if it's a paper, but it basically was translating our transliteration for uh for uh last election in 2024.

Yeah, so if there's a contract, then it would be part of this list of contracts.

Okay.

Under the proposal, the contracts would have like the name of the uh of who the contract is with and um and its cost, and then just briefly, because for for God's sakes, contracts can be 500 pages, you know, um, just you know, one one or two or three sentences or a paragraph or something about what does the county get for that, right?

You know, what what is what is the services they receive for that cost?

Um so um I'm imagining it would be three short items per contract, and you know, just in a list.

Um, could be in a spreadsheet, it could be in a word document, you know, uh, just for our education and understanding, and then also that that information would be available then, Ty.

Um, right.

So that would include consolidated printers, the you know, translation um uh vendors, and other stuff that we haven't thought of, I'm sure.

Like Sims, for example, right?

That's a contract, right?

Or you have a contract with SINS?

Or is it or the poll pad people or something?

No ink.

No ink is our poll pad vendor.

Oh, what is it?

No ink, no ink, okay.

So that's another one that would be on that list, you know, just the the various contracts that they have.

It might be that they they you know, if they're below a certain amount of money that it's not worth bothering with, but we can work out details like that, right?

Um so thoughts on this one comments from commissioners?

No.

Okay.

So um so then I guess I will make a motion that uh we request a full list of all contracts, um, be presented in writing to the commission after the November 2025 election that would include the name of the vendor, uh, what what are uh what the what the cost is and what services we get uh for that?

Um and that would be sometime after the November 2025 election.

I'll second.

So moved by Lindsay, seconded by Ramon.

Discussion, Karen?

Yeah, do we need to put a dollar limit on it?

Because I assume there could be some contracts that are very small that you know are not worth looking at.

Okay, so over can you make a recommendation on that one?

Like what would be does anybody?

I mean, I don't know, I don't even know enough about this stuff to say what number would make sense, you know.

Over a hundred thousand dollars.

Yeah.

Well, what's your what is your what's the price of your smallest contract that you that comes to mind for you well under a hundred thousand dollars okay so would you say that you have um the majority of your contracts do they exceed a hundred thousand dollars in value probably the ones that you're interested in would be exceeding a hundred thousand dollars okay um uh do you think that that's a reasonable number to put a cutoff that we would be looking at the most relevant contracts then if we if we said a hundred thousand dollars or more absolutely okay I think that's some place to start um let's take a look at those and then we can decide whether we really want to get down into the weeds but yeah really and also take up more staff time for not it's not useful information.

I'm just wondering if Ty has an opinion on that since he might have more familiarity with the other folks?

My uh concern is basically that the uh cities uh pay directly to consolidated uh printers for the services for the 2024 elections and the subsequent elections it's just that I want to know for example how that is about when it comes to that um pass through to the ROV for um uh and such because um this clerks then themselves cannot pay um does not pay um go out to bid to go do the elections for the uh for the election services um but we rely on the ROV for that but I just wanted to know like how does that um contract for example get to the clerks itself I did you follow that Cynthia meaning you want a copy of the contract of a contract to know what's included?

Yes what's included then it would be part of the list if it met the criteria but I don't know how much it would cost for like for five if it's under a hundred thousand dollars or more than a hundred thousand dollars that's the question.

Well I think that would depend on the type of election also because if it's a statewide um it would be larger for us because the county also pays consolidated printers not just the jurisdictions because the county has to pay for a portion also can can you get a copy of the contract to tie I could put it in with the request yeah is it is would that work that works okay great uh the other city clerks did you have anything you wanted to uh suggest on this one if they're if you're still here I'll take that as a no do you know if the city clerks are still here Shahir see Ann and Laura okay um if you'd like to speak uh Ann or Lara can you please raise your hand hi everyone thanks um I I'm here and I just during your discussion if you guys have any questions or if there's any input that you know we can offer answer any questions I am totally available and and happy to you know answer anything but I don't have anything additional to add at this time.

Okay.

And Anna isn't raising her hand so I think she's saying the same thing.

Okay.

Jim yes go ahead um just thinking about this do you I know the county must go through a financial audit every year like nonprofits and are required to does it go down to the sort of the department level does the ROV's office have a specific audit where you know the auditors look at contracts and whether you want to hit and all that kind of stuff.

There are procurement regulations that the county has that agencies have to follow um and there are internal audits that are performed by the auditor.

Can you can you clarify internal?

Like the auditor is employed by the uh office itself or the auditor controller is a county agency.

Yeah, like by yes.

I mean, okay.

Thank you.

Anything else on this item?

So we got the I think we have a consensus, but we'll find out when we vote.

About over a thousand over a hundred thousand.

One more question.

Yeah.

Are those the audits available to the public or do they need to be requested?

Are they uh, you know, PRA or I don't know, but we could find out.

Okay, thanks.

You could always submit a public record request and see what happens.

But uh yes, go ahead.

Could you just repeat the motion?

Uh yeah, um so right now where it sits is request a full list of all contracts over a hundred thousand dollars.

Um be presented in writing to the commission.

It says after the November 2025 election.

So that's not a date specific, but it would go on the request list and we'd figure it out, I guess.

Um, and then um, and it would include the the name of the vendor, uh, the cost, uh, you know what they're paid and what services we get for them just in a in a you know in a in brief form uh 40,000 feet, you know.

Um, is there any other anything else?

That was a good point about the uh amount.

Um is there any other changes, any red flags people are seeing or any any changes they want to see?

None?

Um, could you call the role, please?

Commissioner Belcher.

Yes, Commissioner Butter.

Yes, Commissioner Henderson, yes.

Commissioner Moore.

Yes.

Commissioner Ramon.

Yes.

Commissioner Seabrook?

Yes.

Commissioner Barlick.

Yes.

Sorry, could you repeat that?

Yes.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Commissioner Ballantine.

Yes.

Commissioner Whitehurst.

Yes.

Vice President Dieter.

Yes.

President Lindsay.

Yes.

Uh passes eleven zero.

Two, four, six, eight, ten, eleven, yeah.

Okay.

Good.

Um, and then actually I wanted to ask you a question, Sheer.

It's um, for you call the roll at the beginning, but then if people come in after the role, are they still marked present in some form?

Yes, I know that they arrived late.

Okay, great.

And uh which vote they first participated in.

Fantastic, thank you.

Um, so that was uh 8b1.

8b 2 is uh the the formatting is a little funny.

It's on page three of the agenda, it's on the next page.

Um and uh this is I have a note here that it's in page 20 of the um elections pack of the agenda packet.

Um so uh and this is from Commissioner Pham.

Uh so um I guess I'll read the background for those who don't have it.

A question has been raised about whether additional consolidation charges are assessed when a city places more than four measures on a single ballot, cities already incur permeasure cost, translation, printing, typesetting, etc.

Clarification from the registrar of voters on any threshold based charges, the underlying methodology and how such policies are communicated will promote transparency and consistency across jurisdictions, possible action request written clarification from their ROV regarding consolidation charges within more when more than four local measures appear on a ballot, including one whether any additional or multiplier charges apply, two the policy and cost allocation methodology, three opportunities for the ROV staff to present this information to the commission.

Uh the attachment is on page 20.

So that would the last Pete was not background, that's a possible action.

Cynthia, do you want to speak to this?

Oh.

Well, let's I mean Ty, do you want to say something first or do you want to hear from Cynthia first?

Oh, we can go with Cynthia.

Okay.

First.

So to provide a little background on where the where and when this came about.

I believe we tried to research how far back this went, but I know it's over 15 years.

This was first brought up at a city clerk's meeting, a quarterly meeting by concerned city clerks that the jurisdictions that had more ballot measures on which caused additional uh costs could be reallocated to them because it was being those costs were part of the overall cost of the election, and then we would portion that out based off of each jurisdiction's registered voters.

So our registrar at the time took that under advisement and then charged our finance department to do the research and contact other counties, ROVs, and figure out what their billing methods were.

So our finance team at the time put together a method to where we could accurately allocate those additional costs for additional ballot cards, printing, labor, services, translations of those measures onto just those jurisdictions that actually were responsible for the costs.

And so we did that, and we did present it at a city clerk's workshop when we finally instituted it.

And there's typically just a few jurisdictions that go five or more.

They've had 15, they've had 10, they've had 12, they've had six measures that are in addition to, and what happens is we take the cost for just those additional measures and allocate them to that jurisdiction as a line item on the billing.

So therefore, those costs are not shared by any other jurisdiction that did not have those additional ballot measures.

So we feel that it, and at the time, the clerks agreed, especially those that typically have more than five measures, that it was fair that they absorb those costs and other jurisdictions did not.

I have a clarification question.

I've heard the word doubling.

Is there a rule that you double the cost for a city if they go from four to five?

It's a reallocation of just those costs.

So it's a line item that will say, and let me give an example.

Before they were just charged for candidates as all of the registered voters within their jurisdiction.

But since they've gone to districts, they might have district one, district two, district four, and they're charged for those individual districts because those are the districts that require an additional ballot card.

So they're charged for candidates, and then they're charged for measures because measures appear on a separate ballot card.

So it's a separate line item.

So when you have more than the number of measures that were decided on, that constitutes an additional ballot card.

So they're charged for that as a separate line item based on the number of registered voters, which since every registered voter votes on that measure or those measures, it is an additional line item based on the number of registered voters.

Does it double their cost to go from four to five?

I don't look at it as doubling the cost.

You could.

I look at it as reallocating all of those costs of an additional ballot card.

So the same as you would have one ballot card that has measures on it, it's one, and now you have a second ballot card, all of those same resources have to go into printing, translating, proofing those additional five or more measures.

It's it's the same.

And I might say that based on other counties, they do something very similar.

There are some counties that have a uh a base cost, and then depending on if you have an additional measure, it's gonna cost you this amount extra per registered voter.

And when we did some calculations, we think ours is more cost efficient for the jurisdictions.

So there's a lot of different billing methods for um elections.

There is a subcommittee that's part of our association of clerks and election officials that we attend meetings, especially at conference, and this is one of the topics now is trying to regular regularize billing and standardize it amongst all 58 counties.

Oh, that's that's really interesting news.

I so it sounds like good.

There's no additional money that's being made on this ballot card or these services.

We're covering the costs and the services for printing and providing that to the voters.

It's just who, yeah.

The number, the the final number, yeah, yeah, it's not a profit.

And when you when it first came up in that addition in that meeting, um as by the clerks, that how are they being built?

Is it part of the overall cost?

And we said yes.

We take what the cost of the election is, and each jurisdiction pays their portion.

So in essence, they said, so we're paying for this city's eight, 10, 12, 15 measures.

And when we looked at it, yes, they are because it's it's being portioned out.

So they wanted us to take a look at that, and that's what we did.

So I've asked several times, does it double it?

And you said, well, I don't think of it like that.

It would it be correct to say that the cost may very well double, but that you believe that that's a fair charge because it's an additional card beyond the the one card you were using before.

Would would that be about correct?

It is that it is a fair assessment of the services and that are provided with that additional card.

They're one and the same.

Okay, they are one and the same as the first card.

Ty, do you have anything to uh at this moment?

Uh, see, I actually do not have any uh questions at this moment.

Um the uh what Cynthia provided actually is um correct.

Uh I mean not correct, but I was just curious to know like if this was 15 years ago, so that was basically around 2010.

Am I correctly assume that?

We're thinking it was it was around that time frame to be we used to meet in person quarterly.

Um, so it was around that time with our previous registrar.

Okay.

Umly because of the fact that this would be information that would have been helpful for uh many of the clerks of um who were not there during that time frame, I would say, um, particularly me when I was not even here in Alameda County at that time.

Uh that being said, uh there are there are some questions with regards to like um even though we understand that the you know that if it's another page that has to be printed out and some whatnot, why would the cost of mailing go up?

For example, I think uh Laura and Ann has that question that they brought up to me before.

Um and uh Laura in um actually Lindsay, Jim?

Yeah.

It'd be alright if uh Ann or Laura can actually uh just speak just a little bit about their concerns as well?

Absolutely.

Uh Laura and Ann, if you don't mind.

Yeah, I'm ha I'm happy to speak on it.

So I'll just break it down for you.

We pay an alameda $4.63 per registered voter.

We have 52,000 registered voters.

That's 243,000 that we pay for if we have a candidate and four measures.

The second it goes to five measures, we would pay again $4.63 for those 52,000 voters of 243,000.

The register has given us a breakdown of those costs included in those costs are voting machine replacement costs, warehouse services supplies, transporting the equipment, poll workers.

You're not setting up additional machines, poll workers.

I don't get how the card makes all of those charges double.

And maybe I'm missing something.

And Cynthia, I apologize if I am, but it just seems that having one more card for one more measure, it's just it's extreme to pay 243,000 for a measure when our, you know, other all everything else we've paid 243, and and also, you know, I will say I've heard different things from the registrar's office that it was in 2020 that this was implemented.

Um, like they've not had an answer of when they really implemented this.

And I literally went back through all of my meeting.

I keep all of the copies of all the meeting things and I have them and have looked at them and and never saw mention of it.

But I do recall when we raised the concern that hey, maybe if some jurisdictions do have more measures, there should be something.

I guess I just never understood because I haven't had over five measures in my jurisdiction since this has been implemented, but I would have been shocked.

And I've been with the city of Alameda and been the city clerk since 97 with the city and since the city clerk since 2001.

So I've been going to these meetings a long time, and um it's just you know, it it just doesn't seem that this method is maybe the best method.

It just for it to double like that for one extra measure.

Well, this is a really these kinds of things.

How do you take a cost and apportion it fairly among 14 different cities and maybe maybe unincorporated areas or tourists?

I don't know, I don't know what it is.

Um, you know, and what portion would the city not pay, but the state would pay.

I mean, this is a very, very complex thing.

But Cynthia, would you be would you be open to some sort of reconsideration uh of this very, very old policy that has confusing a lot of people and there's would you guys be open to discussing with the city clerks and taking another look at this?

I mean, not for obviously not for this year, but you know, after that.

So we've been talking about this with our finance team, actually, to just take another look at it.

But that's why I wanted to bring up about the subcommittee with the association, because they are looking at all the different methods that county ROVs have, even to the point of limiting the number of measures on a ballot.

There are counties that say you can't have any more than three because of the costs.

Wow.

We've never said that.

Um, but in going to these meetings, um, you tend to hear how things are done.

And it's interesting because it really makes you evaluate what you're doing at your county, um, and especially with neighboring counties.

I'm part of the Bay Area Association.

Um, it's a coalition of Bay Area counties, and we just had our kickoff meeting.

And, you know, some of these items that we brought up as principals was billing, especially amongst the neighboring counties.

We want to see what we could do to possibly be more in line with each other.

And there are interesting things that I never thought of that other counties are doing that we may be taking a look at now.

Um, just in either recouping costs or a way of redistributing costs.

But to what Laura Laura was saying is equipment is affected.

If if you're voting on a touch screen, you have another screen for ballot measures.

Those screens have to be, you know, um designed.

They have to be calibrated, have to be tested.

So that is in addition to for labor and services.

Postage.

If you add another ballot card, that increases postage, the weight of the envelope that's being mailed out and possibly returned.

So there are things that we have to take into consideration that if the county is going to have to pay for it, we have to recoup the costs.

So we are looking at billing.

So I I don't I don't think there's a debate that you know adding a new card would necessarily um add more cost.

I think the the issue is really a matter of proportionality.

How much more cost is reasonable under those circumstances?

Um and I'm I'm shocked to hear that if you add just one more card, essentially doubles the cost.

They're paying 463 a voter, 240 something thousand dollars.

You add one more measure that takes it from four to five, and all of a sudden you have another two hundred and forty-five thousand dollars.

That seems a little rough.

And so I'm wondering, you said that you are talking about with your finance team.

Are you guys trying to find a different way to handle this?

Well, or have those discussions started.

We have had discussions on it because like I said, we have an association that's looking at it.

So we're trying to see what the methods are that other counties are using that we might be able to adopt and see how it works in our county.

Um, but it it we do have to look at, you know, what are the costs, how are they portioned out.

And regardless of, I get it, when you look at it at face value, you have four measures and you add five, you're getting another card.

We have to look at all of that to see what other methods could apply to where we are recouping all the costs still.

Yeah, I would note that if they fix this um issue, you know, where it's not going from 243 to 486,000 uh because they added in one thing.

Um, and I think Laura's points that not 100% of costs are doubled by adding one card.

Um there are a lot of fixed costs involved.

So for one of the examples, I can't remember the various things she said, but one of them is say vote centers, you're not adding another vote center, you know.

Um, so things like that.

Um, so but I will note that that just means that other cities will pay more than that city did.

I mean, you know, it's it's just a question of how the costs are split up among cities.

That's right.

I mean, they have to they have to pay their bills, and there's a certain number of costs and the money has to be split up.

So this is something that um it's very interesting.

It's great that that uh this is the California uh clerks and election officials association you're referring to.

Yeah, um it's great that they're working on it, your finance team is looking at it.

I do hope you involve the clerks because they're the ones who are deciding who's gonna pay what.

Um, and if City A pays less, City B is paying more.

Um, so that's just the way it is.

Um, and it's the same thing with some RCV charges, I think.

Yeah.

Uh I believe Ann is up and then she had something to say, but I also have a comment and so Ann, go ahead.

If you have any comments.

I just wanted to add that um, besides what Laura said, um, that I think making everything clear is important.

Um, so the bills that uh we're getting is one detail, and it looks like it's double.

It may cost that much, but if, you know, like if the vote center rental is two times to us receiving the invoice, well, the invoice is not clearly itemized.

You know, we may have to answer to our council too.

Like, okay, well, why is the vote center rental again for an additional card?

And I think the key is communications and making everything in writing and clear.

So I think I believe if this was communicated clearly and the bill is clearly itemized, then perhaps then we understand that uh issue about, you know, if city A pays less, then city B is gonna pay more.

But not with the what that what we're receiving currently.

It's tired.

Um, okay.

Um is this an emergency sort of thing for you, Karen or you can wait for time?

I was just trying to move the conversation along.

Okay, um, so duly noted, let's we have other things to get to, but this is very important to the clerks.

Go ahead, uh Ty.

Yeah, the one thing I wanted to mention was that when prior to my me being in Union City, I uh I was in Santa Clara County.

The one thing that uh I did over there when working with their register of voters at Santa Clara County was that I asked for an estimated cost ahead of time for my election, and it was a form that was provided ahead of time, and we provided them like this is what we're having for our council, and this is what the potential ballots that we would have, and then later they would calculate the estimated cost for that.

Ultimately, it was roughly like uh a difference of between 20 to 30,000 between the estimated to the final invoice, but it was still something that uh it was provided to to me as a city clerk to help me understand how much the cost and the breakdown would be for.

And it would be something that would be something I would appreciate if we could have something similar to that in uh here in Alameda County as well.

And I think the clerks are uh here would be appreciated of that as two.

Okay, um Karen?

Yes, I want to make a motion that we ask um the ROV office to um analyze the uh financial impact of elections, working with the city clerks over the next six months or so, and come back to the commission with a recommendation.

Can you repeat that one more time?

I um I ask that the ROV office come up with a proposal looking at the cost of elections, working with uh the Alameda County City Clerks and come up with a recommendation back to the commission in six months.

Is there a second?

Yeah, I'll second.

Okay, so motion by Butter and seconded by Ramon.

Discussion.

Just clarification to hear from Cynthia about that.

If you see any problems with that, six months is going to put us right in the middle of a pretty major election cycle.

I we are working on this.

We plan to bring what we have to the clerks um to get their feedback, but also we want to work with the association too, because if they are looking at a more standardized model, we want to be able to be in line with that.

So we can definitely provide a um our progress on that, a status check.

I think it's fair.

Would that be acceptable to to um make the motion be um a status check or an update?

What which do you want?

Status check, okay.

So status check in six months.

Okay.

Um, well, we're not using Robert's rules anyway.

You're okay with that, Alex?

Okay.

All right.

I'm totally fine with that.

Okay.

Uh okay.

Um any other suggestions, thoughts, comments.

Did you have something on that?

Okay.

So far as the approved machines and ballots like styles, is there maybe a different type that we could use in the event that we had a year with many more measures.

There are other voting systems that are certified by the state that we actually looked at at the time when before we went to the system that we have now.

So there are other systems that are certified.

So, is it probable that for a election year when we have more than four measures that we could utilize those approved systems to have like a more comprehensive ballot and keep the cost at 2020?

So I see 45, whatever you know.

Sorry, I didn't hear measures.

Um within our voting system, there's a design element to that.

I know the vendor takes user suggestions of enhancements or design enhancements.

I haven't heard of that yet, but there are things I believe that have been suggested regarding the ballot marking devices.

But in terms of enhancements, we add more team members because when you have a large number of local measures to place on a ballot, there's a lot of effort with that, especially with 14 languages that we support in Alameda County.

That is a lot of translation and proofing that has to be done to make sure that the material is accurate and is designed in a manner that fits the voting equipment for the ballot size.

Okay, so those salaries for those additional staff are is that into the uh double of the cost as well?

It we hire a certain amount of team members that we go out to hire for a statewide, let's say with more measures.

And then they might well, just in general, because we have to take everything into consideration.

What will get escalated is over time.

Okay, that was my question.

It's like you hire additional staff for the additional ballot majors.

No, no, we in planning already have a staffing plan.

Making um plans to say, oh, we might have this amount of ballot material or this amount of ballot material.

We go in with a plan to hire, let's say, 400 temporary team members.

We don't typically get that.

So whatever amount of team members that we can hire, that's what we work with.

You can't really hire them midway because there's a lot of um training that's involved with working on ballot materials and especially when you're translating.

So what we will do then is work overtime to make sure that we can get everything in on the mandated deadlines because those deadlines do not move.

They're mandated by law.

I would just like to say, um, could we please look at the possibility of those uh alternative uh voter registration cards or machines that would accommodate you know more than four measures to keep the cost down?

Can we look at that alternative?

I want to make sure I understand the question.

So you're thinking of ballot machines.

I said are first my first question was do you is there alternative ballot styles and measure I mean uh machines that could be used?

You said yes, there are approved.

So I'm requesting, you know, like can we look into the possibility of an alternative ballot style and um machine to keep the cost at a minimum for the for the voters of Alameda County?

So we do look at alternative ballot design every time we go to design a ballot card.

We look at what's available to us based on mandates of the elections code because there are guidelines that we have to follow in terms of font size for voters to be able to read the ballot materials.

So we have to follow all of those guidelines first and then look at a best way to be able to design a ballot card, and so we do look at all of that.

Uh just in terms of changing changing machines, um they sign a multi-year multi-million dollar contract.

So it's very hard for if it was an individual city, they might be able to change it.

Uh I know Redonda Beach counts their own elections, for example.

They can change it pretty much on the fly.

Yeah, well, not during an election, but from one to the other, but it's a county like Alameda County, it can't do that.

Um, you know, you kind of have the machinery you have is a machinery you got um until the contract's over anyway.

Um, okay.

Uh I think we're ready to vote on this item.

Um, could you call the roll, please?

Commissioner Belcher.

Aye.

Commissioner Butter.

Aye.

Commissioner Moore.

Commissioner Ramone.

Aye.

Commissioner Seabrook.

All right.

Commissioner Barlick.

Yes.

Commissioner Valentine.

Aye.

Commissioner Whitehurst.

Vice President Dieter.

Aye.

President Lindsay.

Aye.

For the record, uh, let it show that the Commissioner Henderson left before this vote.

Oh, right.

She had to go.

Um.

Okay.

So we're done with 8B2.

Uh very difficult item, um, because it's hard.

Um, and now we're on to 8B3, uh, implementation of elections code 30165, vote by mail ballots verified uh voting centers.

Um background elections code 30165 authorizes voters to return their vote by mail ballot in person at their designated home precinct or vote center and requires ballots cast in this manner to be processed and counted like a non-provisional ballot cast in person at the polling place.

In early 2025, the ROV office told the commission they hope to implement a pilot during the next special election.

However, in September, they already reported the pilot will not be ready to go then.

Possible action request at the ROV office provide a special report in February on the progress of research regarding possible implementation of 30615.

So discussion, any clarification questions or discussion on this one?

Cynthia, anything to say?

Um our office has been looking into um a pilot or implementation, I should just say of 30165.

Um we've worked with other counties who have implemented it, just looking at process cost um best practices initially uh maybe they had one election under their belt, but then also have spoken to um some of these counties after and trying to see.

So now you've implemented it.

What do you see?

You know, was it cost effective, or what are the resources that you had to put out?

What could you do better or um just in general?

Um, how did voters react to it?

Did they turn out for it?

So it's mixed, to be honest.

So we're looking at all of that now to see um how that would work in our county.

So we're still evaluating.

Um this is not something that we can just turn around quickly because it does take a lot of resources to be able to have this handled at the vote centers.

Um, and we just want to make sure that um before we put forth that step to do it, we're looking at everything that other counties did.

And again, um counties did it differently.

They had different resources, they advertised it differently, um, they had different results with how it was used.

So we would just want to take the best of all of it, um, the good and the bad, and see if we can um put together the best program.

Uh thank you for the time that you're taking to check it out.

Uh it I it seems that it has the potential to make your life with notwithstanding everything that you just said, easier next November in November 2026, which could be uh an interesting election, um and anything that simplifies the process for voters and for you in being able to count ballots in a way that has uh maximum transparency is probably gonna make your might make your life easier.

Um it the the bill or the law was written by a 20 plus year registrar of voters, obviously.

So hopefully uh that individual knew what they were doing uh and and it's and it's written well.

Um anyway, but I I appreciate everything that you're doing.

It might be useful for the commission to just to get um a more specific report on what you're finding, maybe because it you've been looking at this for a while and with special elections and everything else thrown in the middle of it, understandably.

Um but just to get a little bit more uh specific information on what you're actually finding might be useful.

Um are you the possible action would be a special report in February on the progress of research regarding possible implementation of 30165?

Does that work for you guys?

I think we can put together something that shows um what our findings are um from other counties.

Uh I think that's probably something that we could um show you guys on what we found um just based off of the input and um we actually had one smaller county that implemented it.

I want to think it was El Dorado.

They actually came and did a site visit with us and they talked about a very small county.

Um so I don't think we've heard back on exactly what their outcome was.

So we're interested to see that also.

Um so we are engaging and we are um collecting all the information that we can because there's a big difference with our county size in implementing something like that than you know, an average county.

So when we're going to do it, we want to do it well.

So um would this include a um I I would hope that it would include some kind of roadmap, maybe not an absolute promise that's written in stone and sworn to on the Bible, but some kind of planned roadmap or possible roadmap to implementation.

Well, I think what we can include is is the findings and maybe what it would take to implement something like that in a time, you know, with timing also.

That would work.

That would work, yeah.

Okay.

Um so um is anybody willing to make a motion on this one or we can just take the one from the agenda.

The agenda, the the one in the agenda is a request that the ROV office provide a special report in February on the progress of research regarding possible implementation of um uh elections code 30165.

Yeah.

Uh okay, Irene.

Oh, right.

I would just add the words finding to that, progress and findings.

Okay, progress and findings, okay.

And Karen and then Judy.

Um, and I I would like to add your point, Jim, about uh possible roadmap toward implementation.

Okay.

Um so regarding uh possible implementation and uh how to word this.

Can you give me some wording here?

I'm not a wordsmith.

Cynthia suggested what it would take to implement.

Uh regarding possible implementation of 30165 and what it would take to implement.

Yes.

Okay.

And there was also, you know, by a certain date, right?

You know, uh, and what it would take to implement it by a certain date.

Is it gonna be by November 2026 or we're not shooting for that election?

I mean that would be wonderful.

Um I'd love to see this thing to put to bed, but um I it that's for them to say they're the professionals, they're the staff, but you know, um to implement to implement it by a certain date.

Um go ahead.

If um if we're talking about the language that simply uh specifies what their um what they're describing uh in terms of what it would take to implement, it seems like it's useful to say it for the November 2026 election.

They're not committing to doing it.

They're saying this is what it would take to put in place for that election, which I think is the election that we're concerned about.

Cynthia?

Is that what do you is that okay, Cynthia?

It's a pretty tall order for that election, just to be honest, because of the type of election it is.

We if we wanted to pilot it, we were trying to do it in a more manageable election.

Um so I don't know if I we can't commit to that election as long as that's known.

We can try to see what it would take.

Look at the implementation and the resources that it would take in order to do something like that and bring that to you in February.

So in February, we would say in order to do this by November 2026, it would take X, or if we did it at the first special election in 2027 or 2028 or the first, you know, whatever, it would take Y, something like that.

Okay.

I had a question.

The potential of having it implemented or piloted in a special election, which is more manageable for the department to really be able to um test it out and see what resources are needed in a smaller level, and maybe one that's not as high focused.

They're all high focused elections, but that one's pretty major.

Yeah.

I my question was the RV's office has already been um researching these methods, right?

Um for some time, like with other counties.

So there's already like um, you know, quality of uh data on on these methods, like in a document, like you guys already have that.

Can we see that those methods of collection and you know what how this information was accrued to?

That'll be in the special report in February.

Okay.

Uh Karen?

I just wanted to emphasize that uh or um to make sure that the report includes what the resources are, including the financial and people resources, because obviously there's going to be that and whether that's already part of your budget.

I mean, not answered now, but it's part of the report.

Thank you.

Anything else?

The motion is it currently reads Shahir?

Do you have it?

Do you want to take a shot or should you want me to repeat it one more time?

Okay.

Uh request that the ROV office provide a special report in February 2026 on the progress on the progress and findings of research regarding possible implementation of uh 30165 uh and what it would take to implement it by a certain date.

And we didn't we have some we don't need to say every word that we asked her and she answered.

I believe she's gonna keep her word.

Um so um somebody willing to move that motion.

So is there a second?

What was that?

I thought let's say Taiga seconded it.

Okay.

Um so uh so Belcher uh made the motion and varlock seconded it.

Okay, if there's no objection, we'll call the rule.

Okay, go ahead.

Commissioner Belcher, aye, Commissioner Butter?

Aye.

Commissioner Moore.

Commissioner Moore.

Aye, Commissioner Ramone.

Aye.

Commissioner Seabrook, aye.

Commissioner Varlick, Commissioner Valentine.

I Commissioner Whitehurst.

Aye.

Vice President Dieter.

Aye.

President Lindsay.

Aye.

Uh are you calling that 10 zero with one abstention?

Or one not present?

Yeah.

Okay.

So 10 0, one not present.

Passes.

Thank you very much, everybody.

And the last item here.

We have a special report to response to the grand jury.

And we have, I think we can do this if we move fast on this number four.

So what we have left on the agenda.

I'm just trying to get the timing here.

The proposal to establish a youth participation ad hoc subcommittee.

But then also we have a ROV report on the grand jury report that's scheduled for 20 minutes, and we have public comment.

So I think if we can just not spend 15 minutes on number four and just try to get to the um get you know get to it as quickly as we can, then that'll give time for the uh special report and public comment.

Um so um Commissioner uh Varlock asked for this item.

Um background Alameda County youth voter engagement is an important area to support and develop.

California law permits pre-registration and student poll workers at 16, and in Berkeley and Oakland, 16 and 17 year olds now have the right to vote in school board elections.

Establishing a youth participation subcommittee will allow the elections commission to support these efforts and strengthen youth civic engagement.

Possible action approve the creation of a youth participation subcommittee to coordinate with the register of voters on outreach and program development.

Uh let's start with you, uh Commissioner Varlock.

Anything to add to this?

Just that I am willing to follow the ROV's lead on what's possible in speaking about this um beforehand.

I understand that we're a recommending body, and I may not be able to do all of the things I would like to do with the subcommittee.

So I want to say I'm just excited about the prospect of the committee getting formed and also willing to be open-minded about what's possible.

Okay, comments from commissioners, uh questions, comments, discussion.

I'm a little bit confused about this issue particularly.

I thought that you already had a youth advisory committee.

Is that not correct, Cynthia?

We're developing a student ambassador program that we talked about, I think it was in the last meeting, where we're reaching out to all the Unified School Districts in Alameda County and having students be deputized to be able to reach out to their peers at the schools and pre-register and advocate for voting and give them a little background on the importance of voting.

So this is the program that we're developing now.

I one of the things that I wanted to report on this topic was um we have partnered with a group called DJ at the polls, and just so happens that today we had our first event um with the partnership, and this group is a nonprofit group where they work within underserved communities, and they advocate to engage students and not just students.

When we had our um meeting with them initially that I was part of, I also asked if this could be broadened to underserved communities, particularly since we're trying to see if we can serve better um black and brown voters in general, and they absolutely said yes.

This is part of their curriculum.

They would love to work out with us a program that we could do more reaching to more communities, but today they came out, they had bus students from the high schools, and I think we had maybe 40 or so that came and pre-registered to vote, and we're super excited, and um it was very organized, and this was just the first to see how it would work, and so now we have maybe 10 to 15 other events that we're going to schedule in the communities to have the students come to our office and pre-register.

Um, and this is all of course, because they will be possibly eligible to vote as a youth voter um next year and also be a regular voter next year.

So that's something we're very excited about, but just branching off our student ambassador program that we've committed to, and I have a clarifying question, and Commissioner Varlik can uh correct me if I'm wrong, but what I understand is maybe that um Commissioner Varlik wants to somehow get plugged in to the existing program that you're working on and maybe keep the commission abreast and maybe offer ideas is that an option that's you know entertainable here.

Um so um are you saying that you don't think we need a youth uh participation ad hoc subcommittee instead we should look at alternatives?

Is that what you're saying or something different?

No, we could still have uh set up an ad hoc committee here if or a committee of one, but to somehow work with the existing um ambassador program to go plug into that because otherwise the county is doing a I don't know, it seems it would be two separate issues, but I'm just throwing out that idea.

Commissioner Roblock?

Sure.

So I I think that I I'm really excited to hear all that the new um ambassador program has going on.

I think that there's a lot of potential for growing education within the sphere of not trying to co-opt what the grassroots it looks like um registration efforts are producing.

Um I think there's a lot of low-hanging fruit that we may be able to implement um with the county to educate youth that might be in a house, youth that might be in a juvenile justice system as well as in foster care, and I'm looking more at potentially giving suggestions for the educational side of things, because many people don't know that like um Jim read out there is a right to vote for 16 or 17 years old in at least two of our count in two of our cities, and that you can even get a job at 16 as a poll worker.

So I think that I love to hear what the ambassador program is doing, but I think that there's room for more education, and I definitely think it could be something as you mentioned.

Um I'm not sure which commissioner made the comment.

I'm sorry, I could I can't really see everybody, but I would say I would really appreciate being able to report out on all of the efforts if there is some type of subcommittee formed and we will be, you know, essentially uh working hand in hand with what's already there to make sure that everybody stays informed and we're growing our youth participation, which I think going back to what someone else mentioned is the goal, especially with people that impact the community, so we don't lose those voters before they even start the process.

Um I thought I saw Judy's hand up before.

Yeah.

Well, okay, and then so it's gonna uh finish this piece of it with uh um Karen and Irene and then Judy and then Allie.

Yeah, I totally support what Commissioner Varlek is uh suggesting.

One of my issues is that we have a pretty active program in the city of Alameda getting uh youth registered, and we just did that with 16, 17, and 18 year olds.

So I would like to make sure that they're included in this process as well, um, and not um marginalized what is already going on, but try to build upon the effort throughout the counties and to encourage others to participate as well.

So, do you mean uh pre-register or registering?

Is Elameda registering uh youth to vote in the school board or pre-registering for pre-reg it's pre it's pre-registering is what you're talking about.

Oh yeah, it's pre-registering 16 and 17 and then 18 when they turn 18, obviously they can vote.

But we we don't have any school board, it's not a yes.

I um support this proposal.

Um I think it would be great to uh take a deep dive into the work that you're doing to engage with our youth, such as the one that you just shared.

Um this is really an opportunity for us to focus on uh this generation and it's really really important.

So I really support uh establishing an ad hoc committee for this.

If I can just add one other thing, it doesn't need to be a committee of one, so in case people want if it passes, if case people want to volunteer.

That's what I was just going to ask you.

Are there any volunteers who would like to be on the subcommittee?

Yep.

Uh Jim, could you turn your mic on?

Sake.

Um, okay.

So uh right now we have three people that have volunteered.

Uh Taiga Varlock, Ali Whitehurst, and Karen Butter.

Just remember, since the uh with the current number of people that we have, you could have up to six people that are in this Brown Act group.

They don't have to be on the committee, but they could uh participate legally as long as you keep it down to less than six people, right?

Um, and that that happened in another committee, and then at another meeting we just added them in officially.

Um so you know, people have their space there for more people to join in if they're interested informally or formally, just be careful.

You don't get more than six people talking about it.

Um so can we get a motion?

Uh the motion would uh would be to approve the creation of a youth participation uh subcommittee to coordinate with the registrar of voters on outreach and program development and appoint uh Taika varlock, Ali Whitehurst and Karen Butter to this uh subcommittee.

So moved to the ad hoc committee, it's been moved.

We have a second all second, I mean second.

So moved by Belcher and seconded by Butter.

Uh Dieter, sorry.

Um other discussion?

Could you call the roll, please?

Commissioner Belcher.

Aye.

Commissioner Butter?

Aye.

Commissioner Moore.

I that was an aye.

Commissioner Ramone?

Aye.

Commissioner Seabrook?

Commissioner Varlick.

Commissioner Valentine.

Aye.

Commissioner Whitehurst.

Aye.

Vice President Dieter?

Aye.

President Lindsay.

Aye.

Uh so it passed 10 to 01 not present.

Yes.

Yes.

Okay.

Great.

Jim?

Yes.

Um, Cynthia, you mentioned you were registering youth.

Did you mean pre-registering?

Just okay.

Pre-registering you.

Because Berkeley and Oakland youth register to vote in school board elections.

So they actually register, not whereas what you're talking about was pre-registering.

So all youth voters have to pre-register by California law.

Okay.

Okay.

But then and when they pre-register, the pre-registration be turns into an active voter if they're in a city that allows it.

Yes.

So if they're in automatically does it.

If they're in Berkeley Unified or Oakland Unified, then yes, it's the system was built in order to isolate them to vote on school director.

Alright, super.

We have 25 minutes.

But lately, maybe we should do the public comment first and then we could use the rest of the time on the report.

Let's do that.

Right.

And then we don't have to guess or or run late.

So let's do public comment.

If nobody objects, it's a change to the agenda, but nobody is rejecting.

If you'd like to make a public comment, please raise your hand now.

Looks like we have two.

Okay.

Um by our rules, you have three minutes each, but if you could keep it to two or one, we'd appreciate it so we can get to this report from staff.

Jackie Coda, you have three minutes.

Okay, I unmuted.

Uh thank you so much.

I'm hoping you can hear me.

Yep, you started the clock.

Okay, very good.

Uh, thanks so much.

Uh sorry I missed the uh comments earlier.

I was a little late getting to the meeting, but um a few things.

Um thank you so much for addressing the 3016.5.

Uh, I wanted to just do a little bit of information.

Um, and thank you for uh allowing me some grace here.

Uh we've been discussing this for over two years.

And uh it was uh they told you that they were gonna be looking into this uh after uh the general election because San Diego has our same systems, and they implemented it in the general election for November 2024.

So continually using the excuse that oh, we have to keep looking, this will actually improve costs and efficiency in our votings 3016.

So the new commissioners, please do a little bit of research on this.

And please, I'm very frustrated to see that you would be willing to vote, uh, do a subcommittee for underage voting, but not for this.

This upcoming election would have been a perfect time to implement 3016.5 as a test and process.

All it is is you bring your ballot that you get in the mail to the vote center.

They check you in as an in-person voter, and you drop your ballot that you already filled out into the trolley.

Simple.

All they gotta do is make sure that you've got vote card number one or vote card number two, and not two vote cards number ones or two vote cards number two.

Pretty simple process.

Contra Costa County has done it.

So number two, the youth voting.

Um, we've been hearing about this.

You guys, uh, the uh ROV has been bragging about how they've been spending so much time on a monthly basis.

Why aren't they giving this uh much attention to compliance with the law?

This is very frustrating for the public.

You're spending a month every month focused on youth voting on your pet ideological projects and ignoring implementing the law.

That's very frustrating for the public.

I would like a subcommittee for 3016.5.

The public wants a process by February.

Not just, oh, looky Lou, look at what someone's done, we'll give you a report.

No, we're tired of it.

You've been dragging your heels on this.

It will make costs more efficient, and votes will get counted that day because they don't have to be scanned in.

They don't have to go through signature verification, etc.

etc.

It takes educating the public, and not only that, Lisa Marquez asked for a flowchart of what the ballot has to go through for VBM 10 months ago.

The ROV office promised they would put that up on their website.

Nothing.

Not only that, the public wants to know on the MOU for underage voting.

Was that billed and has it been paid back?

We want to know the dollar amount, please at the next commission meeting.

Thank you.

John Guerrero, you have three minutes.

Um regarding 3016.5.

It actually will streamline the in-person voting quite a bit.

They may also, you know, maybe encourage some people not to, you know, vote by mail or drop off their uh their envelopes, but that's just walk in, check in, and drop your ballot into the uh the ballot box, like as if you you voted.

I mean, in person.

It will streamline it.

And I I'm the one who actually votes in person every year, and I I don't mind standing in line, but it is it is um the the delay is because they they have to print the ballots out and people have to vote and they'll you know, someone gets done, they exit the note and let another person in.

But if all you're doing is checking in and dropping your ballot, that can actually be a separate line, and that can go very quickly.

And it hopefully would encourage more people not to, you know, put their their envelopes and which go through all kinds of processes.

Say, well, if I have my ballot's already, you know, filled out, all I have to do is drop it off, we'll have to check in and drop it off.

Maybe maybe they'll save the ROV a lot of time in processing those envelopes by just going through this quick line and just dropping it off.

Um different subjects.

Uh the youth voting.

Um, I realize that you know it's really a city issue, but the ROVs involved and and the underage people the minors get to pre-register.

And I would encourage these uh ad hoc committee to look at that law, which is uh election code 2155.3 that governs pre-registration, and you'll see in that law that they do allow miners to go ahead and pre-register.

What it specifically says in there, that they will not be eligible to vote until they turn 18, and that is the law that governs pre-registration for minors.

I would encourage them to look at that, make sure they are not violating that law.

You know, the county is not violating that.

Thank you.

Okay, let's go to the special report.

So I wanted to report that the um Oh, I'm terribly sorry.

Um I apologize, but uh this is um in the agenda packet.

Um the actual report that um the ROV's office responded to the grand jury.

Um it's pages 21 until the end, 21 to uh 39 or 40.

Um and the although it says draft all over it, this exact wording was approved by the board of supervisors, okay.

Sorry, go ahead, I wanted to report that the ROV did um provide a response to the grand jury report, submitted it to the board of supervisors for their approval, and the report was approved by the board on October 7th, and the final draft of the report was submitted to the grand jury by the board of Supervisors.

I'm sorry.

Okay.

Um, so what I wanted to do was just go over um some of the enhancements that we've already made, and based off of previous reports from the grand jury, public comment, um suggestions, and the commission itself with regard to enhancements at the registrar voters.

The purchase of that high speed scanner ballot sorter was done, and we're more in line with other counties now in terms of automating that sorting system.

So we have used that now over several elections, and it is it does make the process more efficient in terms of timing.

So we wanted to make note of that.

Also, just trying to acquire as many additional processing space as we can because we know that's a big concern from the grand jury's report, time and time again from the commission, from a lot of outside entities about space and then having more machinery, having more staff to be able to bring results faster.

So we we're just looking at what additional spaces there are when it comes up, but it has to work within our workflow also, meaning it has to be adjacent to where we already have existing workflow or processing done.

So we were able to acquire some additional space, and we did use that space to make a bigger observation area, as you all know, and that seemed to work out well.

I think observers have a better view all around the room now.

That was noted by the grand jury and when they came to visit and a lot of the observers as well.

Another item that we've done is looking at 2026 in general and what we can do to enhance, and again, I'm going to bring up space.

So we were able to acquire additional space from ITD, which is their data center.

They've been moving a lot of their servers onto a cloud-based system now, so which means they don't need the physical servers in the data center now.

And we've been able the ROV to obtain a good amount of space that now we're reworking our flow, which means that it'll allow for more space for adjudication workstations.

So if you've come to our office and you've seen the adjudication process, it's it's a fairly good size room, but it's not large enough.

So with knowing that we were able to acquire the space, we were able to purchase additional workstations for the 2026 cycle.

So we're in the process now of working with ITD and we're fairly well along with a lot of the space being available.

Now we're working on data connections and things of that nature, and then we'll be able to actually move processes into the space and do some testing for 2026.

Other items that we're looking at were suggestions off of the grand jury report about observation and being more transparent about processes.

So I mentioned earlier about posting procedures and such.

So I'll talk about we were posting procedures on the walls, and we said how could we take it one step further?

I wanted a kiosk.

So got one to digital and know we worked with being able to get us monitors that actually observers can note, can click or tap and bring up observer guidelines, bring up procedures at their fingertips, and have it readily available in each one of our observable spaces.

So we're really proud, we're happy to make that happen for 2026.

So it's it's one of those things of taking it up to the next level, not just posting a summary of the procedures, but actually having the procedures readily available in the space itself along with the observer guidelines.

And what we're hoping to do by having this is expand on it as we go along and get comment from the observers.

So that's something that we're also implementing.

I just want just clarifying these won't be these the processing space and observation monitors, that's not going to be for November 2025.

No.

The first time will be June 2026.

Okay.

Yeah.

But we will be posting for November 2025 the procedures in every workspace in every processing space.

So that we are doing just so we can enhance the the experience for observation because that was something that I know has come up about we want to know what's going on while we're in the room.

So that's what we thought we would do.

So for November 2025, what was that last one?

We're going to be posting like signage within each observable area on the procedures of the um of the process that they're looking at with a brief summary.

Okay.

Cynthia, I just want to say, as one who did observe at the last election, it I was not clear, always clear what I was looking at.

So I think that would be enormously helpful for people who do want to observe to understand the whole process.

So thank you.

I'm glad to hear that that was something that has come up, and we've tried to um see what we could do to make it um more clear to bring clarity.

Um we provide procedures um to the different workspaces and the observer guidelines, um, but I think having it there while you're looking, we kind of looked at it when you're at an exhibit, and you see an explanation of what you're looking at.

So we took it in literally, okay.

We need to have something like that.

And so we're happy to post now, but for 2026, we'll have the monitors in place or some type of kiosk.

But then again, just looking at other enhancements that we can make um based off of the suggestions from the commission and the suggestions from the public.

And so I know one of the other items that was talked about was with the grand jury report was having a grand jury member choose a um scanner, and so we did put that in our report that we would, and I believe we're looking at 2026 for that as well.

Could you go over that again?

I'm not sure I totally understand what we would part of the grand jury recommendations was to be more involved in the public LNA that they participate in, and they asked that they could choose the machine that we would use during the testing, and um so we worked through it, and we are going to be able to have the one machine chosen by a grand jury member for the public logic and accuracy testing um come 2026 June.

And I have a question, a high-level question about the grand jury uh process.

Is what they did actually a routine?

I mean, do they go around to different registrar voters?

I mean, what is the process that unfolds for something like this, and is it meant to for an advisory role or how does that work?

So all ROVs have a public logic and accuracy testing where they invite, and it's typically the grand jury to come and participate to actually participate in the testing and also observe.

And um, we've always had the grand jury participate.

Um, but they it's not one grand jury from one county that goes around, it's the grand jury within that county that ROVs that participate in the um public logic and accuracy testing.

Just to clarify, every county in California has a civil grand jury.

And they can kind of choose to look at what they want to look at, or sometimes they're given directives by um, I guess the district attorney or maybe the board of supervisors.

I'm not really sure about that part, how they choose their stuff.

Um in this case, they had said that um because that basically I'm I'm I'm paraphrasing, so take this with a grain of salt, but basically they said since everything else was fine, we decided to take a look at the observation and transparency issue, and that's what they chose to look at.

Um that's kind of how how it works.

Every every county does it, you know, and then whatever recommendations they put forward by law that that government body, the civil grand jury, whichever one they're talking to, they have to respond within what is it?

How many days?

90 days, yeah.

Um, and so this is that response to that report.

Did that answer the question?

Okay, Karen.

I had a question about your response to the grand jury report.

Um, I I didn't quite understand it.

It's on page 10 of the document, and it's um item 25-28 and oh I'm sorry, 36 page 36, and it's that first paragraph at the top of the page, and it says um, given that those changed circumstances the ROV has modified its presentation on this information after the November 2024, the ROV considered removing this information from its website entirely.

But though the commission had issued no formal recommendation, I'm wondering if that's the ROV, not the commission.

It's page 36, Cynthia, in the agenda packet.

Oh, this is in regard to um, uh, of you know the part where it says 570 or 570 precincts reported, just you know, for clarification there.

Yeah, it's the section about, but though the commission issued no formal recommendation, I don't think we did.

I think it was discussed, and there was an informal recommendation or agreement uh from the uh registrar at that time, that's my memory.

He said that's right, you have a good point, and we'll work on that, right?

That's what he told us.

So I think it's true that we didn't make a formal recommendation.

Yeah, yeah.

Um response to response to recommendation 25 to 35.

The discussion is um uh the ROV met the the legally mandated deadlines for tabulating and reporting election results on page 26.

Um the board supports the ROV um that uh they could um have increased uh facilities and staffing would help, but they need to watch the cost as well.

But at the end, um uh the last sentence says uh um it may be a possible to achieve these goals through other means, technology, etc.

I I wonder, do you ever I I know you do already, but you didn't mention it that um what other how other a lot of counties have really on the spot reporting, quite a few of the counties have way better report timely reporting than we do, that uh you look into how they do it, or maybe they just have more money so they can do all that.

But do you do you look at the other counties, how they do it so much better than Elameda County?

I would need to know which counties in order to be able to comment on specifics like that.

In order to process ballots, we all process ballots based off of our voting systems, whether they be vote by mail, whether they be election day in person at a vote center.

Right.

Um there are some counties that are larger that might have more resources or more space.

Um, but I think you need to take all of those factors into consideration.

Um, like I think Tim has said in the past, just because you might have more space, more staff, more resources, we still have to take into consideration the cured ballots that are coming in also that we need to wait, you know, by law um before we can certify an election, but in terms of timely updates, all counties um they tend to do it differently, and we've tried a lot of different methods in terms of reporting.

Um did you want to continue with improvements or were you done with the improvements part?

Okay, are there other questions from um commissioners?

We have about two minutes.

I don't see any other questions.

So okay, Karen.

Um, how often do the does the grand jury do the um assessment?

As is it something that you you don't call them to come to do it, they decide that you're on the list.

Exactly correct.

They'll let the agency know if you're gonna be part of the report.

It's an annual thing.

Civil grand juries get formed on an annual basis, and people serve serve a term for I think a one-year term.

Maybe it's two years.

Um so but they they they do a report once a year.

I'm almost positive of that.

Yeah, but but the there's not an annual report necessarily of the ROV office.

There is an annual report?

No, okay.

There is none.

The the purpose of it is to try to improve government and they they look at all kinds of different agencies and um have a bunch of their own committees and uh it's quite a thing.

If you're interested in doing something like that, you could volunteer for a civil grand jury, but it's a lot of work.

I had a couple of friends that did that.

Um any other questions?

No?

Um, we have finished the agenda.

Without objection, we'll adjourn.

There is no objection, we are adjourned.