February 28, 2006
Truth held hostage: Day 151

Today's P-I editorial is on the money:

The state's intent on open meetings and records is clear. The government works for the public and the public has a right to know what is done.
Somebody should tell this to Deanron, who acts as if he only works for himselves. Deanron sent me this letter on Friday, flatly refusing to release the remaining voter database transaction log records that I've been asking for since September 30, 2005 (detailed background at this post).

It's time to resume the legal proceedings I commenced in October and to haul Deanron back before a judge to compel disclosure of these critical records. Please help if you can. --

In his latest letter, Deanron offers no explanation for the nearly 400,000 absentee ballot records that he's clearly withholding. He also claims that the remaining voter registration transaction log records are exempt from disclosure, which is also nonsense. Some of the personal information that voters submit on their registration forms is exempt (e.g. driver's license numbers), but that's not what I'm asking for. I'm asking for the audit trail of Deanron's changes to the database, for which there is no plausible exemption. But I can only assume that Deanron is making these desperate implausible arguments for withholding the transaction log, because he is afraid of what it reveals about serious errors and possible illegal acts committed by his elections office.

I now need to take Deanron back to court, because that's apparently the only way he can be convinced do his job and obey the law and disclose the records that the public is entitled to examine. This is all about the integrity and transparency of the elections office and the people who run it. It's about whether the integrity and transparency problems of the 2004 fiasco have been corrected or not; it's about whether the people in charge of elections in King County should be trusted to consolidate their control even further and impose mail voting on the entire county; it's about whether we want to elect an auditor who is directly accountable to the voters, or whether elections should be run by the Executive's appointed political operatives; The information in the transaction log will help us all make a more informed decision about those critical issues. Deanron might not want us to be able to make an informed decision, but that's not his call to make. His agency's records don't belong to him, they belong to the people. Unfortunately, he's making us fight just to defend our inherent rights. And we're at a disadvantage, as Deanron has the unlimited tax-payer funded resources of Norman Maleng's office, while we have to pay for our own legal fees out of pocket. I can't afford to fund this by myself. Please contribute and help me wage this fight. (Should the judge award me fines and attorney fees, I'll retain the balance in a dedicated fund for similar types of public interest legal cases in the future).

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at February 28, 2006 11:29 AM | Email This
Comments
1. What have they got against transparency in government? Yes, please resume the legal proceedings. Tip is in the jar. The voter DB transaction log records must be released, these are key to understanding whether election workers did their jobs correctly. Trust but verify.

Posted by: Jeff B. on February 28, 2006 12:09 PM
2. One check coming up. Mr. Logan may enjoy political protection for his stonewalling, but it'll be fun to see him hop around when the legal guns are pointed at him.

Posted by: Hank Bradley on February 28, 2006 12:11 PM
3. Done.

Posted by: South County on February 28, 2006 12:23 PM
4. What? Mr. "Open and transparent" isn't? Here comes a few shekels into the tip jar...

Posted by: Misty on February 28, 2006 12:48 PM
5. Not very amusing, but instructive.
Good job Shark, keep it up.

Posted by: Amused by liberals on February 28, 2006 02:50 PM
6. I'll gladly pay to see blood sport like this.

Posted by: rickyragg on February 28, 2006 04:36 PM
7. Stefan,
No money yet. But I affirm that transaction logs on individual records are critical. In particular, I affirm that comparing the logs to KCRnE SOP on merging records and crediting voter history would be useful. Further, I affirm that the public and transparent reconciliation between the lockdown versions (General 04 and others) and the canvass report per precinct would benefit from time stamped transaction logs on individual records and fields.
Other than a deathbed confession, getting transaction logs will be the best chance of ever finding a smoking gun. My hope is that the addition of legal peril to KCRnE would 'freeze' honest individuals in the dept from hitting the delete key on any Log. [Transactions logs take up space, are often considered volatile, and are subject to deletion, EVEN WHEN THEY ARE WANTED.] For those who have money, this is worth it.

Computer Science, UW, 2003
Gregg

Posted by: Gregg on February 28, 2006 04:50 PM
8. Yeah, coming from Gregg's perspective, and having managed some large DBs in the past, transaction logs did indeed take up a fair amount of space. In the corporate world, we viewed them as only needed for replaying the DB back to a good state given a catostrophic loss. We could use backup tapes plus playback the transaction logs to restore the DB. So what was important were the recent logs, and they were mostly important for recovery from a recent disaster. Most DBs tend to have some kind of built in log rotation mechanism where logs are deleted over time after they have been fully played into the database. Mostly, databases are looked at as being significant in the present. There is often little need to fully restore a DB to a past point unless there is a special legal requirement to be able to pull an audit at any particular point in time. Given Logan's handling of voter registrations duing critical time periods, I would not be at all surprised if he showed equal disregard for any reconciliation of a past DB.

It's quite shocking from the perspective of an IT professional. I mean, if it were up to me, the database would be meticulously checkpointed at the last date of registration, at the commencement of ballot acceptance, and at the close of ballot acceptance and certification. All of those would be very significant points in time for reconstructing any problems resulting from a close election. During the whole 2004 mess, there was never a time where there was any concern for this level of reconciliation, including during the discovery for the trial. The lawyers really botched this area. To me it seemed as if the Republicans really didn't want to rock the boat.

I would not be surprised if Logan's people deleted the logs long ago knowing that they contained the trail of interesting information of what elections employees did and did not do. That might be why Logan is simply denying your request on the basis of having talked to his IT staff.

At this point, I think that barring an FBI investigation where they come in with a warrant and get everyone to stop what they are doing at gunpoint so they can sieze all of the computers and backup tape for analysis, the data is most probably gone. However, it may still exist on backup tapes.

I've always found the comments of "Joe" and "Insider" to be interesting. Maybe a better approach would be to offer a bounty for any KCREALS employee that comes forward with evidence of impropriety. I know if I worked at KCREALS, I would have waited for just the right moment, and then come forward with as much documentation as possible regarding its culture and practices.

Posted by: Jeff B. on February 28, 2006 06:05 PM
9. A definite "worthy" investment!

I'll contribute.....(just to see Ron Sims and his cronies squirm....)

Posted by: Deborah on February 28, 2006 06:53 PM
10. Done

Posted by: Marc on February 28, 2006 08:00 PM
11. I'd like to see a closed circuit - hidden camera telecast of future encounters with Deanron. The Shark smells blood - keep us posted on further developments these two weasels joined at the hip !

Posted by: KS on February 28, 2006 08:04 PM
12. I just loved how this was CC:D to a "Senior Deputy Prosecuting Attorney" are they preparing for a law suit? I hope so, cause it looks to be like they are getting one. Tip is in the Jar!

Posted by: GS on February 28, 2006 08:49 PM
13. GS - it was CC'd in order to classify this a "attorney work product" and protect it from further public disclosure.

Posted by: SouthernRoots on February 28, 2006 09:15 PM
14. God bless you, Stefen. You are a righteous warrior for truth.

It is my joy to help with your legal expenses.

Posted by: Paul J. Henry on March 1, 2006 02:09 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?