 Order the Board of Civil Authority at 2.10 p.m. on March 4th and the first item on the agenda is the agenda. I would welcome a motion to amend or adopt the agenda. Motion to adopt the agenda. Thank you, Councillor Powell. Just so you, is there a second for that motion? Second. Second by Councillor McGee. Discussion of the motion. Seeing none, we'll go to a vote. All those in favour of the motion, please say aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Motion carries unanimously and we have adopted the agenda. I just want to confirm all councillors who are present have their cameras on. We have, it appears, one, two, eight councillors and Councillor Jang is in person. Okay. Councillor Freeman, are you helpful if you turn your camera on for the management of this meeting? Councillor Mason, next item on the agenda is the public forum. I'm recognizing Councillor Jang before we do that. Thank you, Mr Mayor and thank you, Councillor, for showing up. So as a candidate who won through the tabulation on town meeting day, I will be recognizing myself from this vote tonight. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Jang. Your recusal is noted as we set the rules for the recount of the preliminary vote totals. Councillor Mason. I'm sorry, Mayor Weinberger, we can't see who's in the room. For the benefit of those of us on screen, can you tell us who's in the room so we don't direct questions to people that may or may not be there? On behalf of the administration, I'm not talking everyone in the room. Okay, yes. Thank you, Councillor Mason, our assistant city attorney, Justin St. James, and the CEO, CAO, Catherine Shadd, and Sarah Montgomery, the assistant city clerk is also at the desk behind me. Thank you very much. Chief Stafford and Riddell is here as well. If there's some assistance needed with anything, we should be able to make that happen. We also do have town meeting TV staffing, the video feed. So that's basically what's going on here. And with that, let's go to the public forum, the next item on the agenda. Are there any members of the public that would like to speak to the Board of Finance? Welcome, Mr. Franco. Not Board of Finance, Board of Civil Authority. Apologies. So, Mayor Weinberg, sorry, point of information, your video feed just went down, which I don't care about, but if I just want to bring that to your attention in case it matters. Thank you. I'm channel 117 is aware of the situation and is working on it. I think we will proceed and hope that they are able to fix that issue quickly. So, Mr. Franco, go ahead. Is there somebody I look to when I talk or it's like Stephen Colbert doing a show from his office? Your voice is being recorded at this point, but you are otherwise invisible to everyone except the people in the room at the current moment. So, up to you how you would like to handle that. All right. Thank you. The reason I'm here today is I'm representing Councillor Zhang in this recount. And I wanted just to share with members of the Board of Civil Authority, from our point of view, the issue that's been addressed by the most recent member random from the city attorney's office, the issue is how is this recount to be conducted. In a nutshell, our view is that the amendments, the 2017 amendments to the statute that addresses recounts in local Australian ballot elections states that the recount procedure has to be the same procedure that was followed in the original count, meaning that it would have to be a tabulator count. But would that it was that simple because the other sections of the statute were retained to talk about the ability of the other candidate to request a vote procedure. It talks about requesting a also a tabulation procedure. But then the question is if that tabulation procedure wasn't requested, what's sort of the default position? The city attorney's office initially took the position that the default position was the hand count. And we've done quite a bit of research on that and we respectfully disagree with that. And I've had a number of good discussions with Dan Richardson about that. And I should tell the members of the Board of Civil Authority that Dan and I have had previous experience together working actually on election issues. So we worked in good faith to try to honor this issue and also with the Secretary of State's office. I'm just here to say that we very strongly asked the Board of Civil Authority to agree with the recommendations of the memo that was just submitted on Board Docs today, the supplemental memorandum in the course of conduct on the last page, which is basically having a tandem hand count with also with a tabulator count. We think that that's the best way to ensure fairness for all sides, for those who want a hand count, for those who want a tabulator count. More importantly, it will eliminate a potential legal issue for an appeal in the future and it will get really get, I think, get the question resolved. So we support that. We thank the city attorney's office for its hard work and its good offices in doing that. Our view is that it's really important, particularly after 2020, that the public have absolute confidence in the voting process irrespective of what the result is. And the last thing that we want is having some protracted scenario like you saw in the 2000 presidential race. Nobody wants that. So we urge you to follow that procedure. And again, we thank the city attorney's office for its first good offices and getting to a resolution that we think should be satisfactory to all sides. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Franco. Is there any other member of the public that would like to address the Board of Civil Authority? If there's any attendee on the Zoom that would like to be recognized, please use the raise hand function, but I don't think anyone is wishing to be recognized. So we will close the public forum and move now to the Consent Agenda. And I would welcome a motion regarding the Consent Agenda. Is there any Councilor? I'll move the Consent Agenda. Okay, thank you, Councilor Carpenter. I can second. Seconded by Councilor Freeman. Discussion of the Consent Agenda. Councilor Hansen. Yeah, can we just get an explanation of this if possible for us in the public? How these appointments were chosen and why? And is this based on precedent or just an understanding of that? Associate or Assistant Clerk Sarah Montgomery, the goal was to create representation. First off, we imagine we needed eight election workers, election officials. All of these folks have served as election officials including in the last election. No one is going to represent, no one's from Ward 7 and everyone represents different, the three major political parties as well as I think two independent. So the goal was to create a coalition of folks above and beyond reproach who are seasoned election officials to help do this important recount. Councilor Hansen, can I have further questions? No, thank you. Okay, is there any further discussion of the Consent Agenda? Seeing none, we will go to vote. All those in favor of the adoption of the Consent Agenda motion, please say aye. Aye. Are there proposed motion carries unanimously and the Consent Agenda adopted. This moves us to the deliberative agenda which in 4.0 which is the review and approval of the city attorney's office memorandum on recount and procedures. On board docs, their council should see there are two documents, a recount memorandum and an addendum to that. And the recommended motion that we are working towards and really is the point purpose of this meeting is to adopt procedures by the end of this meeting so that both the staff for the election workers that we've just appointed for this election as well as the two candidates are clear on what the procedures on Monday will be. So with that, the floor is open for discussion or motion. Councilor Shannon. Could I just ask that I have not had time to thoroughly review the addendum that was submitted by the city attorney which I think makes some changes to his original position. And I wondered if he could go over what if any changes are being recommended. Sees that we've been working through with the Secretary of State's office reviewing legislative history and it's our office's recommendation that in order to ensure the most transparent sort of process that there is both a hand count and a tabulator recount. And so that is the slight amendment in that are in our addendum and I think that's an additional process. So the idea is to follow the original hand count provisions in the original memorandum and then also supplement with the tabulator recount at the conclusion of that hand count. And so I think that's the main piece as well as to clarify the that and it's started to get set up already but the sense that there will be different individuals different election officials who will be tallying and tallying initially and flagging if there are any questions of voter intent. And then there will be a counting table where different sets of election officials will then recount everything. So it was just to clarify that every ballot in the hand count will be recounted by by separate teams just to ensure accuracy. So I think we just wanted to make make clear that in obviously this has been a fast moving week so we're sorry for the addendum right before but we wanted to be clear as clear as we could with you folks. Yes it's completely understandable in this situation we're going to have some kind of last minute information just trying to make sure that we're all aware of of what the process is and what's being recommended. The what happens I have participated in several recounts at this point and my experience is that um the vote often changes very slightly if at all from the original original tabulation but it's not uncommon for it to change slightly. What happens if your hand count differs from your tabulator count? What gets um how does the election get certified based on what count? Page three of the addendum but so during the hand count if there are questions from election officials and how this is going to work is election officials have to agree on who the candidate is that on each ballot that the intent was to vote. If there is a question or disagreement statute says that gets flagged for the board of civil authority and so those are going to be all set aside and counted in the sense that they are for BCA review and then when the BCA convenes they will review all of the ballots that have been flagged. Those ballots are almost like a Venn diagram in the sense that they will uh and then how it works is the BCA by a majority vote of those present will vote on what they believe the intent of the voter was. I did send out yesterday or our office sent out yesterday um there's a helpful guide from the Secretary of State and certainly uh there'll be lots of resources but but it's a majority of the BCA determines intent if there's a question those ballots will actually be uh sort of separated in the sense that the they'll be recognized that there was a decision made on those ballots um so the it won't affect the the number of ballots that go through the tabular or their hand counted because it'll be uncontested ballots and then there will be a resolution on the ballots that are that are flagged that the BCA votes on so it would be very clear. That's not completely clear I do understand how the process works if in the hand count there's a disputed ballot um that then gets flagged that goes to the BCA but I don't understand how a discrepancy between um the hand count results and the tabulator results I don't maybe the piece I'm not understanding is whether or not it's identifiable where the disagreement is between the tabulator and the hand count. As I would say that our our viewpoint is that there shouldn't be a discrepancy between the hand count or the tabulator count but so I guess that's where where we are is that all ballots where there's not a question about intent will be will be processed either through hand count or through the tabulator and if there are questions of voter intent those will be flagged by humans and BCA will will vote upon those. They're only flagged by humans in a human count correct? Is anything flagged by humans in the tabulator count? The ones that are flagged for BCA review those are flagged for purposes of both the tabulator and the hand recount so that whatever the BCA determines for those that will apply that the outcome of those ballots will apply to both the tabulator and the hand recount. So those that are flagged in the hand count do not go into the tabulator for a tabulated recount is that correct? Exactly that will be there will be a separate that's I'm sort of saying hamfistedly that was the Venn diagram piece which those are a separate the BCA will weigh in upon those ballots and that the count is the count for those ballots. So the overvotes and undervotes that that are produced by the tabulator how are those flagged in any way is that considered being flagged an overvote or an undervote? I think when you're I think when they're operating the machines there's an ability if you get that result of overvote or undervote they can potentially flag that to run back through the tabulator or have the voter correct it so that it can be read by the tabulator I'm unclear as to how those ballots are dealt with by the tabulator. Would those will be pulled out by election officials because as they go through either the tally or the counting if it is not clear voter intent and I would say voting for two candidates is not clear then that will revert by statute to a BCA decision about what voter intent was if it can be decided. Great thank you that's very helpful. The floor is open for for the common count President Tracy. Thanks Mayor for in terms of logistics for that piece around the BCA actually taking the vote with the plan I know that the idea was for the for the election officials to be counting the ballots around midday on on Monday would is the plan would the plan be to then have any ballots that were at question and also the final certifying vote take place in the context of the BCA meeting later on like at this you know like we normally would do with the within the context of the regular city council meeting. No don't believe that's the intent I think it's about and I think we did set a request at a time certain that the hope was and we're happy to amend it the hope was 12 30 or 130 but that way it could be done I mean our goal as obviously certainly city attorney's office and the clerk's office you know we're concerned about chain of custody we're concerned about sort of transparency so we want to remove the ballots from the vaults you know with our election official witnesses count the ballot count the ballots in a transparent way and then during the same process if there are flag ballots have BCA at a time certain sort of enter the room and then help resolve those differences statutorily I think that would be our goal rather than putting ballots away and resealing and that was so we were obviously I know it's the middle of of a work day but I think that was hopefully contemplated that that might be the best way to proceed was to have continuity come in and we put it two and a half hours into the recount based on sort of best estimates but certainly we can can change that however you folks see fit okay I guess my concern is just having counselors not be able to be present you know the the counselors just by nature of their their work schedules not be able to be present for that that meeting I do understand the concern you're raising around chain of custody I do think that is relevant however I am concerned about counselors being able to be present to look at those and I think that given what we're actually having to do here it seems like in order to really probably effectively you know be able to to discern voter intent you'd actually have to be physically in the room you know able to examine the ballot that way maybe you'd be able to discern it remotely but it seems like it could be challenging to to actually inspect the ballot over zoom so that's those are just two concerns that I have both in terms of people's ability to accountability to attend and then ultimately vote and weigh in on this and then also just the ability to to inspect ballots remotely because it seems like that would be challenging and just to explain we weren't being purposely difficult when we set the time but statutorily there's a set amount of time and this was the last day that City Clerk Shad should could set the date so I think that and because of board of finance and city council on Monday night I just just to understand why we ended up at this zero this or a Saturday or Sunday basically so um so yeah you folks can make that decision I would say that I think it would be very difficult but but it's up to you I suppose I think it would probably be very difficult to virtually make some of these decisions just because I can imagine I mean some of this if you look at the guide that our office attached and it's on board docs I think it's addendum K you can see that the Secretary of State's office when decisions about intent you know if you don't have the the greatest internet link or something it can become a connection it could become difficult to tell us as stray mark and so that could be frustrating I think for folks to be remote or I understand that and I just think that yeah I definitely understand that we do have some flexibility with Monday night given that we don't have a very full agenda it's a pretty light agenda so I do think there is flexibility there should we wish to do to do it in that context the other thing is just wanting clarity on board docs because we have a bca meeting with a separate set of with just one item on the consent agenda for that but needing to have I mean I'm imagining that would flow from what we decide here but just having that agenda warned and out there and clear as to which what's happening at each each bca meeting if in fact we are having two different bca meetings there's not currently a time on the other bca meeting that I can see on board docs maybe I'm missing something but just wanted to flag that as well yes President Tracy I think I see what you're referring to on on on board docs I assume perhaps that there was a decision to wait to warn I think we're looking the body needs to decide on the procedures today before that I think can be clarified on on board docs for Monday and I do think we should be clear in the adoption of whatever procedures we adopt as to whether the expectation is that board of civil authority members can participate remotely or or not it is I think important to note that there does not need to be a quorum of the board of civil authority president to make these determinations it's the board of civil authority members who are present will will make the termination on the disputed ballots is is my understanding of guidance from the city attorney's office I'm going to go to councillor mason next and then I've got councillor hanson in the queue and that's who I've got so far go ahead councillor mason thank you mayor windberg just to follow up first on the comment you made I don't my view is I don't see how we would allow zoom examination of ballots I mean if we're looking at filled in dots which I think it will come down to I don't I don't understand and I would encourage this body to require in-person attendance in order to be considered present for purposes of the that bca examination um with that said can I shift this is I've never been through this process I am trying to understand and I cracked title 17 20 minutes ago but given that it's two votes um I'm hoping Justin our attorney st james can answer a question for me am I correct in my understanding that all that's being examined are those you know the non what were deemed non-defective ballots you know those that were accepted and run through the tabulator there's no examination of those ballots that were deemed effective as set forth in section 25 47 before the election is that am I correct in that understanding yes and sorry for just jumping in and not saying that groundwork yes the the analysis is very straightforward for the for the recount which is the bags that contain voted ballots and even the defective ballots which are in there are not counted those are immediately set aside so it's only voted ballots there are and in one point to acknowledge here is there is a superior court review if any party is unhappy with either a prevailing party or or a non-prevailing party there is judicial review basically in a very rigorous process for that where questions of voter intent or defective ballots um you can get it examined by the court that is not the charge here of the bca the bca is simply recounting ballots that were counted on election day okay thank you that is very helpful to understand my other question in this may whether this goes to the city clerk or the city attorney I understand that and upon review the statute there's a procedure set in place for the city clerk's office sort of correcting a defective application but I didn't see a process for purposes of collecting or allowing for a modification of an effective ballot I've heard rumors whether true or not that you know if defective ballots were received in advance there was maybe an outreach to allow the voter an opportunity to correct and my understanding for obvious reasons is that's obvious that is not you're not there's no ability to do that if that defective ballot is cast or hand delivered on the day of the election can someone maybe disabuse me of of what I've heard or articulate what the process has been as it relates to defective ballots I'll let the city clerk speak to the process I will just say that if a ballot was marked effective on election day and therefore not counted it will remain defective for bca's purpose and review if it is going that is to be it could be challenged in superior court but a ballot that was deemed effective will be defective on monday for the recount I'm sorry and I get that what I'm trying to understand that was to say I cast a defective ballot four days before town meeting day was there an outreach or some ability to go to that voter by the city clerk's office to allow them that voter to correct the defective ballot or does every ballot that comes in defective regardless of when it comes in get put in a defective pile and is not run through the tabulate I am going to answer that and then ask Sarah Montgomery who is working in the office throughout the election period to make sure I didn't miss anything it is my understanding that if ballots come in and they are defective ahead of time we do provide outreach to correct them to the extent practical Sarah anything you want to add to that okay she said no that is accurate thank you that is very helpful I'm just so counselors are aware city attorney Dan Richardson is now present as well I'm going to go next to Councillor Hanson great thanks I would I would recommend that if we're able to do it on monday night we should do it then because we're already all going to be here and we only have one deliberative item on our normal council agenda so I think that's we're going to get higher attendance for that than doing it in the middle of the day would be my thought thanks I I agree with Councillor Hanson I think President Tracy made the same point while there may be a standard that we that is just the number of BCA members present it doesn't seem like that's necessarily the assuring the fairest result that we can assure and I think that having it in the middle of the day can prevent some counselors from being able to participate at our regularly scheduled meeting that's on the counselor if you know you weren't participating in that but on this short notice I would very much like us to do all that we can to assure that all counselors have the ability to be present for this so I would I would also like to have it at our regularly scheduled meeting time okay Councillor Shannon I think if that is what counselors have recommended that now I think we maybe need a recess or I think there's potentially I'm unclear the practical there was some discussion previously about practical challenges to breaking things down and then setting them back up I'm unclear what kind of space is going to be needed to conduct this I don't know for are we prepared to speak to whether what would you like a break to this seems to be like probably the key procedural issue here I'm not sure if we're prepared to speak to how viable it is to do what the counselors are requesting we we can certainly take a break and I apologize I had a family conflict at the first half this meeting I'll simply get caught up and uh that way we can we can address this because I think if you have me answered fairly easily and I guess as in what I would suggest as an initial thought couple of thoughts here if I can just offer it and I apologize if I'm being redundant to some of the previous speakers but um you know first of all the decision here is really about voter intent and so it's a very limited question and I would emphasize that that that's really about and so initially and normally what would happen in a recount is uh in in other other communities this provision is really intended to capture the the people running the election so that you know if there's a contested ballot you hold it up hey I don't I can't know what this is do you think this is a vote for jones um everyone said yeah it is or it isn't um and and then it moves it moves forward this is not a sort of formal um process like you would see in court with you know people making arguments and I've represented private parties that have done that where you go into court and you you know you start to argue out these things this is really for you as the bca to make these initial judgment calls um but at the same time we want to make sure it's a process that you know as I said in the memo that reflects fairness um that transparency and public process and I would say the biggest issue that we want to make sure of is that when we do the timing you know there's a primarily there's a custody issue ballots have to be accounted for where they are they're either in the vault under seal or they're in the room that's under the control of the city clerk so you know it may be an issue where we just change and shift the timing of when the meeting starts if we think we're going to go through this in a much quicker process um you know I think the reason to set it at 10 am was just simply to create time within this recount process but if we feel confident that it's going to go much smoother and it's going to go um you know starting at 2 p.m. so that then the bca can meet in the evening so the greater attendance of the bca is not a problem in and of itself and I think it's really just a matter of of logistics and certainly that's that falls to the city clerk and her her duty to make sure that that we create a process that maintains that custody of the ballots uh and the integrity of the process and so you know these these requests are not unreasonable and I think we just have to maybe take a break talk it out and come back to you for a plan if that makes sense okay um I'm going to call a 10 minute recess for us to sort through this and um be able to come back and finalize these procedures so we will reconvene at 255 p.m. thank you we will reconvene 255 um thank you uh for your patience uh as we had that um recess I think um there is a revised plan now um for how we will proceed um I'll let you Dan try to summarize um how we're going to do this sure what we would propose uh for the bca to uh approve um is that the recount will still begin at 10 a.m. and this is because the assistant election workers that we are seeking to have you appoint we've confirmed their availability for the morning we haven't necessarily confirmed it for the afternoon uh and then what we would propose is um that there whenever that um recount process reached its sort of final point as far as they could go without the bca um we would effectively stop the process um room would be secured um and we will take measures to make sure the doors are locked obviously um that items are you know the shutters are closed um and to keep the room the integrity of the room will then reopen at we would propose um like at at uh at 4 30 uh p.m. uh closer to the board of finance for you to do the final pieces as a bca which as I understand and would believe it would be really limited to one reviewing the and making votes on the disputed ballots if there are any and two certifying the final count um so those should go fairly fast then uh we would have the board of finance upstairs um and uh the city clerk would uh take action appropriate with making sure that the ballots were properly resealed and stored uh from that so I think it has sort of the best of both worlds we get still the full day for the recount should there be any hiccups or issues um to deal with it that we guarantee that the poll workers who've committed to coming in the morning are still uh that we're asking them for the same commitment um and you bca members can then take advantage of having the the sort of time that would allow for the greatest number of bca members to attend thank you dan um so um again just to make sure the timing the proposed timing here is clear um dan it dan has just suggested that we would convene call the board of finance meeting for 4 30 p.m. um if you know that we can have some just quick discussion about this now as to whether that's still problematically too early we probably move it back we may be able to move that back half hour and still not disrupt the evening uh terribly um that they're that basically this would start at 4 30 or 5 um and we would go until it was complete and then we would convene the board of finance uh upstairs at um 6 o'clock as is currently worn for and if that had to be delayed because the bca proceedings were taking longer we would delay it um and then we go into the city council meeting upstairs so um with that i see counselor shannon and then counselor paul thank you mayor weyemberger um that sounds like a good plan to me the one thing i would note is i believe this is happening in the conference room downstairs and that has video capability so as an extra security measure can we make sure that the that the video is on in the in the room when it's shut down is that standing sort of a live stream of the empty room yeah i think people extra no i that's that's uh other election uh facilities do a similar type of thing so that's not an unreasonable request great thank you uh thanks mayor um i would um ask that this body agree that um when we do convene at whatever time it is if it's 4 30 or 5 o'clock or whatever time it is that we agree that only members of the bca who are physically there in person will be able to vote on these ballots um i appreciate the fact that that may be an inconvenience for some people but i think that in this particular case that you really need to be there in person to be fairly and completely able to evaluate these ballots thanks um thank you counselor paul and um maybe we don't have a motion on the floor yet when there is a motion to accept these uh uh this memo um the rules here um maybe that could be included as part of the motion um if uh to assess whether the body agrees with that um counselor shannon were you looking to be recognized again well if if counselor paul was making a motion i was going to offer to second but i hear you want the motion on the whole um i see was that a motion if i misunderstood i i was unclear that i guess we could have that as a separate motion as well would was that intended to be a motion counselor paul that was actually just a request as we move forward towards a motion i hadn't planned on making one i mean i can but i'm happy to let others do it too great that's the way i interpret it as well and but it does seem like an important point and just so there's no lack of clarity on that um i think that should somehow be part of the uh part of the decision that we make as we adopt these procedures and i'm not seeing any further hands at this point maybe this would be a good time for someone to make make a motion if uh there's no further general discussion i guess go ahead counselor shannon the the one thing i'm still a little uncomfortable about is the idea that we're doing this recount two different ways which which puts us at some risk of coming to two different conclusions and how we what we would do in that case and i understand that the expectation is we wouldn't reach two different conclusions but i guess i i would like to be sold a little bit more on the idea that we should count this two different ways and that we're not um potentially creating some doubt in whatever the outcome is by doing so okay the city attorney Dan Richardson will speak to that sure um and as laid out in the memo um you know the reason why we came to this what i would consider sort of a compromised position is um you know with an aim towards resolving what is a very technical legal question in a way that i think supports the ultimate goals um and values of having open and free elections which is transparency public faith in the election process um and some some rigor um you know what we're essentially proposing is is rather than deciding between two forms we're proposing to have both um and so you know the way the process works either way is there's an initial separating of the ballots and the ballots are put into stacks um and based on who the vote is cast for and whether or not there's a dispute as to voter intent so you essentially in this case would get four piles per per group of of ballots you'd get um you know three candidate piles and you'd get a disputed pile if the election workers determine so um and we're gonna have essentially two two pairs of election workers do that that's that that happens regardless of how we move forward and then the question becomes well do we then physically count these ballots by hand uh and make that determination of um a total count or do we shove these ballots into a machine and let the machine count and you know as i said laid out in my memo there's some ambiguity in a statute um that supports um at least makes credible both arguments and so the idea here is look let's do both we my opinion is that the hand count is is this our stronger argument of the two so that's the official certified but frankly we're creating a process so that the end of the day there's going to be one count um because the third prong of the recommendation uh in my in our amended memo is to say you know if there is a count and say there's uh you know one candidate gets 800 votes the other gets 750 and the other gets or the other gets five you know if that comes out differently in a material way uh when you put it through the uh machines well we should resolve that um because that shouldn't happen uh if the counts are accurate and so you know what we do is i think we meet the technical basis which is how do we count this and there's some dispute about that um and there's some lack of clarity in the law so rather than sort of saying you know if i had to brief this and i had to to do the legal analysis apply apply the canons of construction i could give you a single answer but i think that ultimately undermines the purposes of a recount which is for greater confidence in the outcome for greater confidence in in the votes that this is accurate you know it's the idea we counted this once on tuesday night and it came out with this number and we were doing it again because the numbers were so close we know there's a margin of error human error or machine error um i've never been involved in a recount that ever came out the exact same number most of recounts have been involved in have always come out with the same result as the initial election night but they've never come out with the same number and i've been bigger bigger election state senate or uh state state office races but that it just shows you know when when there's that possibility for for a different outcome you know it's this recount is is our opportunity to build at least a factual sort of record of saying okay we've recounted it we've done both these methods this is the count that we come out with with ballots because then if if any of the candidates say well i'm still not satisfied with the result they can take it to court and at that point they're litigating the voter intent things we can't control um and they're they're they're they're focusing on those issues they're not saying well they didn't count it and and that alleviates one the burden for us as a city to go in and defend our process and it also ensures that um you know there's a certain public confidence in this that you know there may be questions on voter intent and subjective questions that people reasonable people can differ on but the things that shouldn't be differing on which is exactly how many votes in this pile were unequivocally cast for a particular candidate aren't up for dispute and so this is really a vellum suspenders approach to that and our effort is really aimed at not making this be a sort of technical thumping of the chest of i have the i have the slightly better technical argument but what's the purpose of this process to make sure that we as citizens and we as voters are confident in that the outcome is the actual outcome to the greatest degree possible um within reasonable confines and so that's why we're proposing to have these two tests and to have that little process because presumably we're talking about an enormous number of ballots we're not talking about 10 000 ballots we're talking about you know roughly 1700 ballots if there is a discrepancy in the number we should be able to fix that and it's either somebody double counted or two sheets got stuck together and we should be able to clear that up and it's important if it's a material difference meaning it means the difference between changing who wins and who loses and we should be accurate about it um it just happens to be one of these situations where the initial vote totals are so close um in in in first and second that we should be overly cautious about this and make sure that people walk away from this process going well look they clearly looked at all these ballots carefully and here's a clear record and if we choose to to take something to court it's it's really something that's out of our control not something that we have simply failed to do so that we find ourselves here two weeks later doing the thing that we could have done right now okay good thank you Dan um i'm going to recognize uh councilor mason thank you mayor why i'm very i'd like to make a motion to adopt procedures contained in the memorandum for the ward seven recount with the added condition that all members of the bca must be present in person uh for purposes of assessing uh voter intent on any contested ballots yes and no i i don't know that we want to mandate that all members of the bca be present um but those who want to participate need to be there in person not really sure i'm sure that's was the intent of what councilor mason said but just want to make sure we know absolutely was if i misspoke my intention was only those members present i mean you have to be physically present in person in order to take part in the recount i'll second that very good thank you this has been a motion and a second um and further discussion okay i'm not seeing any any hands just one once or twice we'll go to a vote um all those uh in favor of the motion please say aye all right hi hi are there any opposed the motion carries unanimously and we have set the procedures for um for monday i guess i'm not sure we just um agreed upon a time uh fully in that and i guess before we adjourn um uh is there any objections to starting at 4 30 to um ensure that we have sufficient time before the board of finance to minimize the chance of uh delaying that uh body not seeing objections to that so i think we're going to go ahead and warn the the bca meeting to convene at 4 30 and that's when um make the decisions on on the ballots as per the or the memo and again um and the bca members who wish to participate in that do need to be present all right thank you everyone appreciate the due diligence and the working careful working through of these issues an important um important matter uh hasn't happened uh in in number of years and uh it's been very helpful to have your engagement and council to to get the get this right so we'll see everybody on monday and without objection we are adjourned at 3 11 p.m