Replies

UPDATED EMAIL FROM TODAY:

We made the front page of the Tampa Tribune today:

Faulty filter let Hillsborough voters list unlawful addresses

The article comes across non-critical, but piecing it together you’ll notice:

If Supervisor Latimer “had known they were on there” he would have done something about it. (Just not anytime in at least the last 2 years.)

Or was it they “identified the problem” before it was reported. (And still hadn’t done anything about it in more than two years).

Supervisor Latimer says “we were looking at a list of citizens who were eligible to vote”. (They voters might be, but their registrations aren’t. He knows the registrations according to the law are definitionally “ineligible& quot; to vote.)
(Info incorrect or not in the article: And if they’re all so “eligible to vote”, why has he already deleted 31 of them from the voter roll? And if he’s only fixed ONE registration as of the end of April 2014 how does he know the rest are “eligible to vote”?)

The law says he has 7 days to mail notices once he knows of a potentially ineligible registration. Yet he says “The delay in sending out the notifications was because his office had to verify the addresses and check for clerical errors”. (Really? That’s your justification for breaking the law? And by “delay” were you referring to the month long delay from December 2013, or the 2+ year delay since before Mar 2012? And exactly how long does does he think it takes to “verify” 151 addresses?)

And the timing of the notices being mailed out the business day after the citizen’s public records request submission was just “coincidence”. (Really? Or perhaps that was the moment he sensed a front page story in his near-term future?)

Those of you who are already working with us on our voter roll know there’s plenty more to come.

So we clearly need to keep our elections office on a short leash.

If you know folks who would like to help, give them my number.

Best Regards,
Gregg Prentice