Miller v. Lieutenant Governor Craig Campbell et al

Filing 82

MEMORANDUM for Partial Summary Judgment by Joe Miller 81 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Joe Miller. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit, # 4 Exhibit, # 5 Exhibit, # 6 Exhibit)(Van Flein, Thomas)

Miller v. Lieutenant Governor Craig Campbell et al

Doc. 82 Att. 2

(

(

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT FAIRBANKS JOE MILLER, Plaintiff, vs. LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR CRAIG CAMPBELL, in his official capacity, and the STATE OF ALASKA, DIVISION OF ELECTIONS, Defendants. ---------------) AFFIDAVIT OF ELECTIONS DIRECTOR GAIL FENUMIAI STATE OF ALASKA FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT ) ) ss ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case No. 4FA-1O-315ICI

Gail Fenumiai, on oath duly sworn, hereby deposes and says as follows: I. I am employed by the State of Alaska, Division of Elections, as the Director of the Division of Elections. Although I was hired in this position as of January 2,2008, I have a long history of employment with the division. 2. I was employed by the Division of Elections from August 1988 through December 1989, and from July 1995 through early January 2003, At the time I left employment with the division in 2003, my position title was Elections Administrative Supervisor, 3. I have personal knowledge of the matters set out in this affidavit.

Affidavit of Gail Fenumiai
Miller v. Campbell

Page I of9 Case No. 4FA~10-3 ISleI

Dockets.Justia.co

(

4.

During the run-up to the November 2, 2010 general election, the incumbent U.S. Senator, Lisa Murkowski, announced that she would run a write-in campaign.

5.

On October 13,2010, Lisa Murkowski registered as a write-in candidate. A copy of her letter of intent is attached as Exhibit A.

6.

There was considerable public interest in how the division would deal with writein votes for Murkowski in particular, whether voters who misspelled

Murkowski would nevertheless have their votes counted. Because it is the longstanding policy of the Division to apply the standards set out in AS 15.15.360 with voter intent in mind, the Lieutenant Governor made statements before the election, reported widely in the media as early as mid-October, 2010, explaining that ballots with minor misspellings would be counted if the intent of the voter could be ascertained. See, e.g., Exhibit B. 7. After voting was complete, the number of write-in votes for U.S. Senate exceeded the number of votes cast for any other candidate. Thus, to determine the winner, the division had to examine the write-in votes. 8. The division devised a process for counting write-in votes, which it has now completed. See Exhibit C. The counting process for write-in votes had three steps: sorting all ballots; reviewing misspelled write-in ballots and any challenged ballots; and counting the votes. a. In the first stage of the process all of the ballots cast in the election were sorted by 30 election board workers who worked in 15 teams of two. They sorted the ballots into five categories:
Affidavit of Gail Fenumiai Miller v. Campbell Page 2 of9 Case No. 4FA~10-3151CI

(

(

(l) ballots on which the oval was marked correctly next to a candidate's name that was printed on the ballot; (2) ballots on which no oval was marked for U.S. Senate, more than one oval was marked for that race, or a name was written in but the oval was unmarked; (3) ballots on which the write-in oval was marked and the written name was "Lisa Murkowski" or "Murkowski," spelled correctly, and the ballot was not challenged by any observer; (4) ballots on which the write-in oval was marked and the name written appeared to be a variation or misspelling of Lisa Murkowski or Murkowski; this category also included any ballot challenged by an observer in the sorting process; (5) ballots on which the write-in oval was marked and the name written in was not "Murkowski," "Lisa Markowski," or a variation thereof. b. The teams of election workers sorted all of the ballots cast in the election. The automated tally machines that the state uses to count ballots do not sort them. Nor do they segregate "overvotes"-ballots than one oval for the same race-or on which a voter marked more on which a voter

"undervotes't-=ballots

failed to mark an oval for a particular race. The machines keep track of the total number of votes fed into them, and of the total number of correctly cast votes for each candidate appearing on the ballot. c. In sorting the ballots, the election board workers exercised little discretion. The teams of election workers sorted ballots one precinct at a time. The candidates had observers present who could challenge the category into which a ballot was sorted.

Affidavit of Gail Fenumiai Miller v, Campbell

Page 3 of9 Case No, 4FA-IO-3151CI

(
d. When a team finished sorting the ballots for a precinct, I went to that team's table. In this second stage of the process, I determined how to count the ballots in category #4. I was the only person to make the final decision for each ballot. I allowed write-in ballots containing minor misspellings and phonetic variations of "Murkowski" to be counted for Lisa Murkowski when I determined that the voter clearly intended to vote for that candidate. e. The candidates' observers were able to challenge these determinations. If an

observer challenged my decision to count or not count a particular Category #4 write-in ballot for Lisa Murkowski, that ballot was placed into one of two envelopes: "Challenged Counted" or "Challenged Not Counted." These

ballots were segregated. If my decision was not challenged, the ballot was placed either in category #3 or category #5, depending on whether or not I decided to count it for Murkowski.

f. Some observers for Joe Miller had hand-held tally counters and seemed to be
keeping track of how many ofthe ballots counted for Lisa Murkowski they were challenging. Miller observers challenged ballots that that included the following categories: 1. ballots on which the voter had misspelled "Lisa Murkowski" even slightly; 2. ballots that spelled "Lisa Murkowski" correctlylegible and in less than perfect handwriting; in both perfectly

Affidavit of Gail Fenumiai Miller v, Campbell

Page 4 of9 Case No. 4FA-IO-3151CI

(

3. ballots that spelled "Lisa Murkowski'' correctly that added a descriptive term, such as "Senator Lisa Murkowski," "Lisa Murkowski, republican," "Lisa Murkowski, R/' "Lisa Murkowski, independent," and "Lisa Murkowski, write-in"; 4. ballots that spelled "Lisa Murkowski" correctly that added an embellishment, such as a heart, a smiley face, or an exclamation point; 5. ballots that spelled "Lisa Murkowski" correctly in the space below the write-in line rather in the space above it; 6. ballots on which voters wrote "Murkowski, Lisa," in the style of the names already printed on the ballots; and 7. ballots that spelled "Lisa Murkowski" correctly on which the voter had written but crossed out other letters or words. g. I also examined the ballots in category #2-those on which no oval was

marked for U.S. Senate, more than one oval was marked for that race, or a name was written in but the oval was unmarked. 1) I did not count ballots that had no oval filled in for the U,S. Senate race, even if a name was written in. 2) If a ballot had two ovals filled in for the U.S. Senate race, I examined the ballot to see where the ovals appeared. If the voter had filled in the oval by the name of a candidate printed on the ballot and also by the write-in choice, I counted the ballot if the voter wrote in the name of the same candidate. This is how Joe Miller
Affidavit of Gail Fenumiai

Miller v. Campbell

Page 5 of9 Case No. 4FA~1O~3151CI

(

(

received many of his 20 write-in votes. I also counted ballots with two ovals marked when it was clear that the voter crossed out one of the ovals. I did this regardless of whether the voter expresses an intent to vote for a write-in candidate or for a candidate whose name was printed on the ballot. Otherwise, I did not add the ballot to the count. 3) The candidates' observers were able to challenge all of these determinations. h. In the third stage of the process, the election workers counted the ballots and recorded the vote totals for the precinct. The workers counted the ballots in category #3 those that were spelled correctly and unchallenged for

Lisa Murkowski. They also counted the ballots for Lisa Murkowski in the envelope marked "Challenged Counted" but did not commingle them with any other ballots. All challenged ballots were kept segregated in their special envelopes for further review, if necessary. The workers also counted the other write-in ballots in category #5, adding those votes to the totals for the other registered write-in candidates or to the "other write-in" category. 9. The unofficial total number of ballots as of November 17, 2010, cast in the general election was 258,713. Not all of these ballots contained an oval marked for the U.S. Senate race, however. The machine count tallied 255,831 votes cast in the U.S. Senate race, The difference, 2,882 ballots, was primarily the result of the failure of the voters to fill in ovals on those ballots. During the write-in count, it
Affidavit of Gail Fenumiai

Miller v, Campbell

Page 6 of9 Case No. 4FA-IO-3151CI

\

/

(

was discovered that many of these 2,882 ballots were votes for Lisa Murkowski, but because the oval had not been filled in, the division did not count them. These ballots were segregated in the "Challenged Not Counted" envelopes. 10. The unofficial results of the election for U.S. Senator as of November 17,2010 were as follows: Tim Carter Ted Gianoutsos Frederick Haase Scott T. McAdams Joe Miller Write-in Votes 11. 922 456 1,454 60,007 90,740 102,252

The write-in votes were counted as follows: Lisa Murkowski, unchallenged Lisa Murkowski, challenged, counted Total counted for Lisa Murkowski Lisa Murkowski, challenged, not counted Joe Miller Scott McAdams Other registered write-in candidates Other miscellaneous names Total write-in votes 92,929 8,159 101,088 2,016 20 8 53 620 103,805

12.

The reason that the total counted write-in votes is larger than the number of writein votes recorded on election night is because, as explained above, as election workers sorted and counted the ballots, it was determined that some ballots belong in a different category than that originally recorded by the tabulating machines. For example, on election night the tabulating machines would have rejected as an overvote a ballot with more than one oval marked for the U.S. Senate race, but

Affidavit of Gail Fenumiai Miller v. Campbell

Page 7 of9 Case No. 4FA-I0~3151CI

(

(

upon inspection during the write-in count, the election workers might have determined that the ballot clearly indicated an intent to vote for one particular candidate. This would be true, for example, if a voter marked both the ovals for Joe Miller and for "write-in," and then wrote "Joe Miller" on the write-in line. During the manual count, that vote would be shifted from a rejected, uncounted "overvote" to the total for Joe Miller. Additionally, during the manual counting process observers for the candidates could challenge any decision the division made about a ballot. Murkowski observers challenged the division's decision not to count a ballot with no oval marked for the U.S. Senate race when Lisa Murkowski's name was written in. Because the tabulating machines can register only marked ovals, not writing, on election night these no-oval ballots would not have been reported as write-in votes. After manual inspection, they were segregated and placed into a category of ballots considered challenged, but not counted. These ballots would be part of the 2,016 figure noted above. 13. 14. Alaska has 438 precincts. There were approximately 2,500 people working at polling places across Alaska on November 2, 2010, the date ofthe general election. 15. These election officials are trained before Election Day as to the procedures used to assist voters and to process their ballots. 16. As part of these procedures, election officials must verify the identify of each person who enters a polling place to vote before handing him or her a ballot. They do this by checking certain types of written identification, examples of which are
Affidavit of Gail Fenumiai
Miller v. Campbell

Page 80f9 Case No. 4FA-IO-3151CI

(

(

\.

listed in AS 15.15.225. This is not necessary, however, if the official knows the identity of the voter, with one limited exception for first-time voters. 17. The precinct registers, which each voter must sign before receiving a ballot, contain a space after the signature box for each registered voter in that precinct. Election workers can check one of the three choices listed in this space to indicate the method they used to verify the identity ofthe voter. A page from a register book is attached as Exhibit D to illustrate this. The three choices are "VC/' to indicate a voter registration card, "01," to indicate "other identification," or "PK/' to indicate that the voter was personally known to the official.

¢(:JJ~
Gail F enumiai SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this 29th day of November, 2010.
STATE OF ALASKA
OFFICIAL SEAL

f''-'''''''''' ,

Kari Lee Spencer
NOTARY PUBLIC
My CommIssion Expires With Off/clI

Affidavit of Gail Fenumiai Miller v, Campbell

Page 9 of9

Case No. 4FA-1O-3151CI

"

J0I13R!e1:!'~DQ7 522 23;1,
, Q~'~~

~.'.: OkectoO'fscr ' r
··. ·

.. "" , '.' ..,.....': : ~1me«.~r~~'~Jt~,.&mffl~rt~¥O~
· ·· ' ·· r ,.

3.
. ..

"

~

.

W
ll.!V I)F g~BCT RM II
@OO<J?IOOOoi

I

·

·

f

,~.;

"1i'f.SQf!.~~~
' ' '

"

"- .'~.-" '

~

.,--...
:.- ···.··

, .'
· ··. ~

13at RP~ '' .
~'.: ······

GI;~'iNt~l:1it"Tf~ ·(~pdnt.or~~
·

-.

·

·

,~....
· ·

-o"·~·

~
-'

...··

~

.. ".....
.,

'". . ,,:c.W't&:~. ~ bf
. _ .~""

""',f"'i;·~i:::::titJtwrrHRi:'i'im'fi ,.. <4.9,
··.·.·.·......· '~YJ' ~ ~l,J.j1W e~tmt

~-

..

.,.....

~... .tama.~I~~·~w.~,~ ~,
.P~

(1.

".

>.'.

.

: ~. ~Nmm~kTO.S~T. OJ~ ~
J'iljnfl~~~fqi~1i~~lh1T·:~~~If~~~fJt Jam.~J.,llld~andarna~9f~~~~~

UH~P.f.fIff~~filfA;lW@

.

M-T .... ,). "
. polIIf<:ai~
~~+ .::.:

. .:..~~~~~ .
··· ~ ~ ",_.n

.

~--":'

fl!!fiJ t!-~Qf~

···...,·......,...,...,_:'._""j-.~~'"'fi' 't '
"-. ·

.. :'.

. ..:.

.~

... ~ ..... . ...,.""'":;ro-.---..~...,.1oi,~~~~ . ~, 'RfiSljMr .,~.;;"' : ~ .'". :-00.. ' :-. .
T"' , ···

OR
~

-.-r
.,.... ··

.~~qR.

Q··

. .'

..

.... ' .. -, "/«sc~l~~~~
··· _ ··· ~.,... ·· ~,,~~

.~.~.~ .
···· -~ ·..

··

.,.. ·

~

>

'haW~at1tdi~~'JL.<
~m$lfR9~,:.: ~:_. ~:" . .

...

~W.4 .

~~'1~F,

~d"

."
.;'

' .·...

.. ~-

". '.'.

,.,
.

~~~~~¢~.s_mAA
.

~.
.: ,.. A.$..

'~WI;~

.: ..:~,., ' '

. ·":r.~

....

~.. ..

.. .

.

.

. .. . .
..·. '

.

(

...... . . ~
EXHIBIT A
Exc. 102

Campbell: Minor misspelling
tfJpda1ft(fd}
Posted by AlaskaPolitics .

WQU't

spoil ballot

Posted: October 14:.2010 - 11:17 am

By BaCKY -BOHRER
Assoeiared Press Writer the overseerof Alaska elections said Thursday t\U~the doesn't.expect that minor misspellings will di~qu&lify wdte-lnballotsfee

u.s. Sen.

Lisa Murkowsk].

Lt.· Gov, Craig Campbell told the Assoclated Press that official.s d:QIl't want to

MurkQ-wslcl. thAf those PJ3.119.t.swiJ1 be-counted for her,

4hienfj'8,J,lCmse any.- voters and that he. suspects,ifthere's .

a minor mi~sR~1ling qf, say. .

"I'm sure they're g9in~ to. be lenient'! in countingthose ·.he said, adding that QffictAls will to their bestto count !;>~UQtstbilt show "clear intent." , But Campbel] said the farther a ballot ~&tsfrom Including either her last name or Lisa

M\!rkowsJci, ~ m,o.te.q.tffiCJ,ltt it willbe for baUo! cO:UI).tet:~·todeteinline.vQterintentand' the wore likely it will be for th9§~ b.allot~to ~~ challenged, particularly lfthe race is
tight.

While·nM!.:U'~.ow~ky!pro~Slq]y wouldcount, hl':s,aid, it's questionable whether "Liza," ' Lisa misspelled, wou,ld;.. Murkowski, who lost the GOP priwctryto !QeMlll~f,o.ffl~iaUy filed as aRepubllcan
write-iacandidate

Wednesday. She said'she had not gotten a clear intemret~Jion from voters in an attempt to avoid to fill in the-ballot oval an~ write in "Lisa MWJ.;,9\ys!d.'!

th~ state ?S to what would count and wasencouraglng

any challenges -

.She also is u~g,irtgsupporters ~ if they need - to scrawl her correctly spelled name on a piece of paper they can take with them into the polling, boorh or
tQ-

write her name on

, their hands . She's .alsobanding out blue wristbands that read: "Lisa Murkowsk! Write it in," with a darkened oval. The director of the state Division of Elections s~ys voters will

EXHIBITB
PAGE 1 OF2 Exc. 103

l-::J
~

f

be allowed to wear them 3.0 long as they're-not visible to others. If they are visible, that

would be like·,'#efUjng..a.cJU+l.PaigA-butmn.on a.coat, ;.~chisdt.&llpw.ed, and.the. voter
would be asked to remove it. Campbell said that neither Murkowski nor her attorney has contacted firm. But he said she appears to be doing theright thing in educating her supporters about the write-in process, His read ofthe law is that voters would need to blacken the oval and either write in Murkowski or Lisa Murkowski thereto

her nameM it apj}.eiU'on her declaration to ron s

for

be no question about whether their vote would count.

Murkowski faces Miller and Democrat Scott McAdams. She also faces long odds: the last U.S. Seaate candidate to win in a write-in bid was.Strom Thurmond in 1954. And

her opponents believe they have adistinct advantage by having their names already
printed on the ballots, Murkowski's campaign slogan is "Let's Make History." (
Read more: http://cqmn;H!nhYA'\dn,com/TIl;)(le/I536S5#lxzz14p.Xx~Zsc

EXIDBITB
PAGE2oF4
Exc. 104

- h"6ifrlflligwBt-e=rn

'Votes'':':--US'Sei;~teRal!e

r~(jwed,

Wh~n se;paratr.ng 'hallpts. to count.the indivi41,ta)., write-jn votes, the ballots will be initially sorted #rst ~ the bifti~50rtt if necessary, the director will make a dete~n~«9n on -vote! intent. -Once ·~Uots a~~sorted and challenges are handled, t.hl:! ballots wUI be counted and individual "Wrlte-lnresults will be

~pJOY¢~ !QUo.wingth~ ballo. transpott at "@.Ht1m~. t Qqlcl!;JeltSecurity willremain attheao1.:mtingceriter
Op~:hj;)~ disfrl~t .willbe count~dafe~ah .

BUU"clirtg to the, Division. of EI~_tiona bal10t room. There will be <:Id:iviltiD.n

Ballots will bE!4~iV~l'l;ld. Qy ~oldRelt aefurlty. There will be a (l~nl;l! tustody . in~trog the district and number of b..QXeb~g-kansported from the D~vis!pn s ofE!ec;j,ions pttllot l'9Qm tp the Alaska.Lithe Building a,nd frQ.lll the Alaska Litho.

to ensure ballotsecurity,

roble .. The veted ballots are ht se-p~at.{!/,~eiij~4envcl9P-~ by 'pre:e:iritt th~e Will be QI),lYne ptecirte.t 'opened at o.' i}~. "When a precinct c()}4I.fis compl~te.41. i:h~'V"Qted'ba1iqts ~e i:~l:.j:nne4o the t PJ:~c~~rt'v~qp~ ~ s,~a1edb'th!=! CQUttt1p.g ~ea,m._owte.~gJl.d allots Willl;le t b sealedjn sE!p~a,t~ ny~!ppetJt ideI}ti,£t.ed- with thedistrict-anq RJ;f:!cinct-nwnber. e
Results Will bereporled

by .Q~triGtat the completion 6f-~aph.q~tdc;:t count,

lhitiai Ballot-Sort ~o;tt b~ItQ.l;$. U~ th~·bO:iJidsto i.rqtWly~ortthe ballQ}:¥I f..!~~Q]Jo~:;;. ; . 1. Place ballot? w.~a.l'.!t,he ova))$. Itt!A'ked (~6Ioted m.-X1 S\:a.r,~~c;:J<-I e~,) nextto a e~<U_dEtM'$ 'name' that is pdnt(!d on the uaQbt (those other than the W:9te,.Ii1~~teg9ry-). . 2,. ~~f.h!!-Uo.tswhere the- US;~te·~{tc.ejs left b~~ "(~Oova1I11~~ed)or ~OI:El than. op.!3 oval is~maxke.d··or: a riame :t.~wrltten·ln~ but-no oval is . m.<Uked . . 3. Flac~ birllQts.where the ovalIs marked for -Wtite~rn category (colored in, Xi Start ChecL;) aiiq the name iswrl.ttenas LISAMUIU<0:W,sl(:i.QU JVIJ1~QWSl{Jm4 ':(pelte-'d cQr.t;~~lYtb~.<wg l'fbi dtallen.g~.g.. t .4. Plac~bat1Q1s Wh~r~th~ oval is marked forWfiwItl cEit~gQfYt601Qred in, X,

fh~ie''Wiltba5hoxliMusedto

.M'Uiu<:owsJ{i
Page l of S

Mo. p1a~l} n this Ild ~i-brillot·thatMo.bs~rvel. i ' challenges so that the' director Can make a detetmination.

Star~.Chook) and 'Tl!E l'f~ Wl.U'f'tEN A-.P:eEARS TO ~E A. V41UATldN OR M1SSPEL.tlN"G OF'MURKQWSia OR LISA

'"
EXHI~lT C
·· ·· · ~ "_ ,_~. TO ·

+.

_

PAGE10F3

Exc. 105

5'; PIaee11l1ffpnrWfw.retireoVaIiirmi}ffeiHor

written in is NOT Markewski, LIsllMurkowsklor

Wclie.:in c~tegory an<t the ~ame
a -variation thereof.

Afterixili:!al son! rais~ hand for direcrorj Ott CHl'eet9t· designee. The d.k~tot s

q~tgp¢~ ate divisiort staff ~PPQ1p.teclhy the dire~t9i'tov51:Ud.a,te that.the.b\:lU9ts in box lld·#2 are·tt:u1y blank: over voted ballots, All other ballols will be reviewed the director,

by

or

Diredor Deterptingijon . 1, ~Jh blllfot iiihJX lfd #4 wiU be 1e'Viewed to d~~rmme votet intent. YVhen revie,ving ~~e baUO~t they will l.1as.Q.rtOO into4 ca~gqti~ as JOllows: .
a. De·~tionp;w.q¢
lUI.

vote fQt'Wrlt~InqUlAtdate

LISa

WiT) ~·p1,.:\cfAin bpx1i~

MtU'kaWski and 4~~~t.tl1JtiQn-ia:NOTcltall~J:1g~g(These ballots , #3[or-®llnt;iJ:lg,) .

b. D¢iermlnation made t.oC01,1nt the vote for Wtite~In candidate Usa. hfqrkow:skiand detetltlitJ4.t;iO!l# dl~.uenge·d. Th.es~ aI.ro~ wiU be b segrega~q and placed into tmvcl(;)pe l,;l;beted- Ch;lU~rtU!~d. . C:oJJ.ri~d·fo.r MtU'kow~ki; The49~1 numorii' of vot~tr~m:theoo ba116fifwiJ1 be :r?!:l9r4~·qon the rei1tilfs s.hem- as: votes for Ml,ltkpw&l;i.

~~Wlted Ch:al1e~g~.

c.

. CdU'p.ted GhaU<;ng.oo.

Pe~tiQn. matleto.~OT<;o.unt. the vets £o.rW~t~rIn~~ndl4ate Llsa .M1frKbW~®4;4~t~m1nationihaJ1~ngeq ·.J-hes.l'!.ballo(s s· wiRbesegte~~ed ·and,··.Bla~¢4o ~velope labeled - Ch~I~n·geA int NOTCOti::ntea fgr !vJl,til<:oWskJ. The tob;l1 f1.Umbltr of votes·from. . ~~~ fmll~~ will b~ added to the tesilltti sh~t.~ Mwk.owski _ Not

d. ··P~~munation h}~u;.l~o·Nb.I·cQ\lIl,t the Voe~{<;It Wt{t~1.n eandidate ~ ti$il..:M:w;k9W5l:\i" <Wd det~tiott i$ not,clWlenged. T4~~ l,allQw are then placed in bo~,Ucl:#5,
_ e<;9rdin~ Re$td.td R 1. H.omd,-coUnt the n~~p 9f b'.dlpf8 from Box Ud #3 (vot?s lor Murk9wski) and record. t;h~ t-ola1number O:t:\ the re.m.It8 sheee (certified wrl~-in candidate I1st) (<ir Lisa Mutkows~ . 2. Count +h¢ . n;umbe:c··ofb<iU¢~"iii th.e.tIChaUenged - Co'un~eqfoJ;l Murkowqldu envmope<md record the t()t~.nun1beI' on the t~ult:& she~t Iin,~ Lisa ¥mkew~Id':'Counted: Chfillen,*d. Mer C9tmtirt~ return these ballots to fi!~w~Qpe. .

:the.

.3. Count the number of ballots In ilia (IChaJJ¢nIDii.d - NfJ.tCountedfor M"l4rkowski« envelope iU'tdl'cor-d- the total number on the J;'e$u1ts sheet. line for Mur~owski - Not. Counted Challenged. After cO'!ffiting, return.

these ba.ll'ots

to t1te envelope;·

.

..,

Pagel of~
EXHIBITC PAGE 2 OF 3
Exc. 106

4,ff011-the-baUets'moo)t

Hd'#5-{~1nvbre'fof C"afttl.ic{afe other man MUI'kowski) sort the ballots into the separate names. Count and record the fndtvldaal results for those ca,ndidatea a.ppearing on th~ certified w~te~in ~didE\t~ list or on the ballot (record the results next to the name

on the results sheet), lithe name-writtsn in does not appear on the results sheet record the votes on the line Other Wri{e-fn.

Page 3 of3 EXHffiITC
PAGE30F3

Exc. 107

:MS)
'VI~ El-ID
~Jo1E

lUGEt4R ?'Alfl?y"I,DENTlFlS"
IiH-UI:llt:;.>:·

DT,S·TRICT .7 2

STAJ\E· OF Al:,tlSJ(A -- DlVtSI:O~OF P:REC'li'NCr REGrSTER'

E~ECTIONS

PREClfle'F 710
It
R·

DATE·; 1

.. "flGE: l

TIME': 1
'R$lDEHCE

·
~:t~~,
:ADDREss
ADD'RfiS;S .

a)

o

'<""""

W

o x

.·...·.

~

o

LAs;r-.~T-.DntE;
UI()()()
R>

SiS.I.sRitttmE

. ~vt:') '(·a\r:>·(;PJCi.~

IV

-

E9

>::

::t:

J:iJ

ANCHORAGE

~-l'.
)'

f ('1\) (

).(
:)

ANCHORAGE

C:=~i~.~2Jl%=~~.~~.);-(-)). ( ._~ ~~·R ~· :[· ~ -I {
.rI'---- --.----:::"---_._----. --'-... ~ .-. . ~~ ;':": -;--t~lII:iII";iI"';'IIi~··:IIi11.';.:.:.:~;."~,.;,~~~\.1'""---..: I. :"I '~L ,.' ~ I ·. :·· . _ ~,

. . A~CR.ORAt3E

f .., ·. ..
:!l:."

-J!](!:rtri~t-\--_-·_:.-~---' -

? ..

.*., I",.' ~ };!>,{::: :': . .. -----~----: . . .~

;

~N

), , "r~" ).

I\NCHORAGE

ANCRtmAGE·

AK

ANCHORAGE

ANCHORA'G~

At'lCHORAGE

ANCHORAGE
C'~"C

AHCHORA'GE

ANCHORAGE AX

A'NCHOR'A'GE

~-.~ ------.---~-'----w-.~~-,------------~------~ I -, ..

I
-~

ANCH1)RJ\:GE
-,
',
''

'··..····..

,....,.~''I'oAT.·:l:C)CIl:"

~

~lil\".l'o.T ~L: .'

~

_.

".

____

1__

-

,1111111111 '