NPA councillor George Affleck wants review of Vancouver election process

    1 of 1 2 of 1

      About 43 percent of Vancouver voters took part in the November 2014 civic election, an increase from 35 percent in 2011.

      But Non-Partisan Association councillor George Affleck wants to know how many of those voters reported problems at polling stations.

      In a motion going before city council next week, Affleck says there were reports of “confusion and irregularities” at voting stations, such as insufficient ballots and inconsistent checking of identification.

      “Lots of questions, lots of things that were brought up, either by e-mail to us as councillors or that were reported in the media,” Affleck said in a phone interview.

      He noted there were seniors who were discouraged by long waits at polling stations and a lack of a place to sit.

      The 2014 election marked the first time voters were able to cast their ballots at any polling station in the city.

      Voting was extended at four polling stations on election night after a temporary shortage of ballots.

      Affleck wants staff to present a list to council of any public enquiries submitted to the city about the voting process. He also wants them to “clarify processes and procedures”, such as where members of the public can submit complaints about the election.

      “It’s really providing us with information on what happened, and I would hope that this would lead to improvements in the next election,” Affleck said.

      The motion is scheduled to be introduced on January 20.

      Comments

      3 Comments

      ursa minor

      Jan 14, 2015 at 11:58am

      How about the lack of advance polls in East Vancouver?

      Just a Voter

      Jan 14, 2015 at 12:05pm

      The postcard I received from the City of Vancouver listed my "number 1" polling station as a location that was 15 blocks away. I voted instead at the polling station across the street (which was listed on the postcard as "number 3.") Something was seriously screwed up on the postcards, and it may have affected which polling station people went to, or whether they failed to vote because the location suggested appeared inconvenient. Good to see a request for a detailed review.

      another voter

      Jan 17, 2015 at 12:30am

      seems like a waste of time.
      If there are questions to be answered, raise the questions to the proper authority.
      If someone is asserting something was improper - be clear - what?
      I do not think our system is perfect, but the mechanics of voting seem solid.
      In case of an 'over vote' voter has the option to redo the ballot or drop the category. So what is significant about the number of these?
      Running out of ballots - maybe a mistake, maybe due to unexpected turnout (which is sort of a good thing - still less than 50% voting). Stations extending - seems preferable to turning away anyone who showed up before the deadline and was waiting.
      So what exactly was wrong?