Our 2008
and 2009 e-elections went so smoothly with the services of Vote-Now
that virtually no discussion by the Executive Committee was needed to
decide to use this firm again. With two years of experience with
Vote-Now's system behind us, everything went very smoothly. We again
included photos of the candidates with the biographies and statements
which accompanied the ballot. We used an "election roster" available
from the national ACS offices.
Voters receive, by e-mail or postcard, a unique login and password, which will only work once. This prevents multiple ballots from a given voter. Voting may be done from any computer with internet access—home, work, or even one in an internet cafe or a public library.
The Vote-Now "Silver" election service package we have ordered each year includes electronic reminders to vote, and a postcard mailing to those without e-mail addresses or whose e-mails bounce (usually because the member has failed to update his or her records with the national office). Included on the postcard were directions for obtaining a paper ballot if the member desired, so no one was disenfranchised (one of ACS's strict requirements for an e-election). This year, no one asked for a paper ballot.
Despite the fact that as usual (sadly), all candidates ran unopposed, the total number of ballots received was nearly 10 times the number received in 2007 (the last year when we ran the election ourselves and used paper ballots). The number in 2010 was very similar to those received in 2008 and 2009. Very nearly 10% of our electorate voted, despite the uncontested races.
A
regularly
updated
graphical summary of ballots received (final version shown at
left) was made available during balloting. Ballots arrived in
spurts, coinciding with the initial announcement and the subsequent
three reminders sent by Vote-Now. The final vote counts were made
available immediately after the end of the voting period. This allowed
us to schedule balloting to end very shortly before the December 1
deadline for submission of results, and still get them in on time.
The cost of the election to us was somewhat lower than the costs we saw in the past when paper ballots were sent out and mailed back to us by the members. Electronic voting also saves our members the (admittedly small) cost of mailing ballots back to us.
Vote-Now provides a space on its ballots for voter comments, and we received many favorable ones about the ease of voting. A few complaints were also received, mainly about the fact that our races were uncontested. (We have found it very difficult to get volunteers to serve on our Executive Committee despite our having nearly 3200 members.)
The Executive Committee thought the whole thing was a complete success, and we plan to continue to use Vote-Now for the foreseeable future.
Karl Marhenke, Secretary
Santa Clara Valley Section
Voters receive, by e-mail or postcard, a unique login and password, which will only work once. This prevents multiple ballots from a given voter. Voting may be done from any computer with internet access—home, work, or even one in an internet cafe or a public library.
The Vote-Now "Silver" election service package we have ordered each year includes electronic reminders to vote, and a postcard mailing to those without e-mail addresses or whose e-mails bounce (usually because the member has failed to update his or her records with the national office). Included on the postcard were directions for obtaining a paper ballot if the member desired, so no one was disenfranchised (one of ACS's strict requirements for an e-election). This year, no one asked for a paper ballot.
Despite the fact that as usual (sadly), all candidates ran unopposed, the total number of ballots received was nearly 10 times the number received in 2007 (the last year when we ran the election ourselves and used paper ballots). The number in 2010 was very similar to those received in 2008 and 2009. Very nearly 10% of our electorate voted, despite the uncontested races.
A
regularly
updated
graphical summary of ballots received (final version shown at
left) was made available during balloting. Ballots arrived in
spurts, coinciding with the initial announcement and the subsequent
three reminders sent by Vote-Now. The final vote counts were made
available immediately after the end of the voting period. This allowed
us to schedule balloting to end very shortly before the December 1
deadline for submission of results, and still get them in on time.The cost of the election to us was somewhat lower than the costs we saw in the past when paper ballots were sent out and mailed back to us by the members. Electronic voting also saves our members the (admittedly small) cost of mailing ballots back to us.
Vote-Now provides a space on its ballots for voter comments, and we received many favorable ones about the ease of voting. A few complaints were also received, mainly about the fact that our races were uncontested. (We have found it very difficult to get volunteers to serve on our Executive Committee despite our having nearly 3200 members.)
The Executive Committee thought the whole thing was a complete success, and we plan to continue to use Vote-Now for the foreseeable future.
Karl Marhenke, Secretary
Santa Clara Valley Section