Mallozzi Seeks Recount, Ballot Review Following 10-Vote Loss at Republican Caucus

As he indicated immediately after a 612-602 vote loss at the Republican caucus this week, First Selectman Rob Mallozzi has put in a formal request for a recount of the ballots cast at the GOP meeting.

Mallozzi told NewCanaanite.com that he has asked the caucus moderator and chairman of the Republican Town Committee—state Rep. Tom O’Dea (R-125th) and Patrick Donovan, respectively—for a recount of the results “and a complete review of the books and information, including spoiled ballots, names of who voted, [and] amount of ballots handed out.”

“I have asked Judge Russell A. Kimes and former Town Council member E. Roger Williams to be present and observe this recount effort,” Mallozzi said.

The call for a review of Tuesday night’s caucus results comes in the wake of what many called a surprising result, with Town Council member Kevin Moynihan garnering 10 more votes than the three-term incumbent first selectman.

Asked whether he would consider pursuing a fourth term in some other way despite the narrow caucus loss, Mallozzi has said only that he is “considering all options.”

Those may include trying again to get on the Republican party line on November’s ballots by forcing a primary in September, or by getting his name on the ballot as a petitioning candidate.

24 thoughts on “Mallozzi Seeks Recount, Ballot Review Following 10-Vote Loss at Republican Caucus

  1. As a registered Republican voter in New Canaan, I find it terrifying that a candidate wants a list of those who voted. Ballots are secret on purpose so that politicians can’t seek me out and punish me vote or lack thereof. Voting in this country is not compulsory. The poll workers verify names, address, and party registration at the door and it should be left at that. If he were to get this list, he could go door to door and call out those who did not vote – very scary and intimidating. As current selectman, he could use this information against people when applying for permits, variances, etc.

    • Thanks Robert and thank you for using your full name, I appreciate it. Just a couple of comments that might help give this some context:

      1. The names of those who voted is public information and is always furnished on request. (How people voted is not.)

      2. My understanding from Rob is that the purpose of getting the list is a matter of due diligence — namely, to crosscheck those who voted with the names that were crossed out by people working at the polls. In other words, to rule out mistakes.

      I don’t know if that is helpful, but I wanted to get the info out there. Thanks again.

      • I thought a fair and balanced explanation of the process with the ballots was well explained however what is concerning is after the last FOI issues and associated Town of New Canaan costs, personal attacks and time that both Dave Hunt and Penny Young endured could better moderators from the Republican Party have been selected I think the citizens of New Canaan are owed that

        • Thanks, Arnold. Though we did not approve any comments that amounted to personal attacks, the overall tone of the threads earlier this week turned so negative that we needed to make a change with respect to election-related articles.

        • I agree completely and was going to write a comment last week on this. I wish it would apply to all comments on every story. We lament the decline of public discourse, and in my opinion, the unattributed comments on news sites is a primary reason. Of course, the New Canaanite does what all media do now, but the impact in a small town is personal and exponentially more damaging than comments posted on a national news site.

          • No, we have a gate up so that no comment shows up unless I approve it. We also do not allow blatantly fake usernames and I myself require identity verification.

          • Yes Mike, you do have an approval process for comments (as do some national sites as well) but i still think that because people can post anonymously the tone and content is different than it would be with the accountability that comes with a name attached!

        • I’m glad that Mr Karp feels this way about use of full names. For the longest time I have been wondering who might have posted false and disparaging statements regarding the neighbors of a Grace Farms using only the initials AK. I’m glad that it couldn’t possibly have been Mr Karp.

          • Tim—I always use my name. You are incorrect that I have posted false or disparaging comments regarding the neighbors—those are my opinions. My opinion is that the neighbors are not being reasonable–in the context of what could be/have been on that site.
            I am happy to use my name and give my opinion.

      • Do you know what is he cross-checking it against? Ballots don’t have names printed on them. So all he’s going to get is a list of people crossed out by the poll workers which indicates they voted along the number of votes tallied. He won’t have two data sets to cross-reference so I still don’t see why having names is relevant to the exercise.

        It’s not like he can sit there and say “Joe Smith showed up and here is Joe Smith’s ballot with a vote for me.” All he’s going to know is that Joe Smith showed up. How does that help?

        • You’re losing me, Robert. There’s a list of names of those who voted. There are separate lists, divided by streets, where poll workers checked off names as would-be voters entered the NCHS lobby. They should square up with each other. No?

          • And you are losing me…So you’re saying there’s a master list of those who voted and then several smaller lists organized by street for ease of checking in. Ok that’s fine, I understand that.

            So how is the master list created? Wouldn’t it be created from the smaller street-oriented lists? It would seem to me that the poll workers would take the small list of names and hand it off to create a larger list of names. How else would a master list of all people who voted be created if not from the smaller lists handled and checked off by the poll workers? Once beyond the poll workers with the street lists, you don’t give your name again, nor does it show up on the ballot.

            You don’t have to “square them up” if one list was made from the other. That would only work if they came from different sources.

            Mallozzi can demand a recount if he wishes, that is fine. But my original point is what is the benefit of knowing the names of voters? I do not see the usefulness in having the names since there is no way to “cross-check” or “square up” anything. All you’ll know is who of the registered populace voted vs who did not.

            The way I see it, the list of names provides Mallozzi with the ability to see if his “friendlies” (as he dubbed them) actually showed up to vote. Or if in reality, he had “supporters” in town that were just blowing smoke in public but did something very different privately.

  2. Thirty years ago when I lost in the Republican Caucus by 10 votes, I thought the gentlemanly thing to do was to accept the will of my fellow Republicans.

  3. Mike — has it right — this list is from the registrar of voters
    that is used in Nov — both parties have list — so what you want to see is how many showed up that could have voted — not to say they did — say this number is 1,300 — now take the vote count 612,602,60= 1,274 that would be OK — what would not be OK is if the number who showed up was 1,250 — you check to make sure you don’t have more votes then people who showed up — the list are public information — no matter who your guy is it would be prudent to check the process for mistakes in such a close election

  4. As an RTC member, I think some important facts have not been included in this thread regarding the balloting. The ballot system used at the caucus uses a paper ballot which is marked with felt-tipped ink markers and then the voter themself slips the ballot into a machine that scans the ballot and tabulates the votes.

    Jim Walsh, who handled the ballot box and has experience with many local, state and federal elections confirms that it is a standard procedure during election hours to remove paper ballots from a scanner ballot machine after the ballots are processed. This is done about every 500 ballots to help avoid the machines from getting jammed with ballots so the machine will operate properly.

    There was never anyone alone with the ballots. Once ballots are removed from the ballot box as is the normal procedure per above to prevent machine jamming, the ballots are placed into a bag, which is then placed into a secure cabinet that is locked.

  5. Jane, you have good points and I have an open mind about this. Let’s see how the comments threads go on these election-related articles, whether they’re robust and full of constructive exchanges, or whether we only see the fearless few and others are afraid to voice opinions respectfully because they don’t want to step on toes.

  6. Well I was shocked — I did not expect them to say NO
    but I didn’t make up the rules — so it is what it is — I
    like the 2 day voting they use to have — 3 hrs on a July
    night to me is curtailing the vote — but that’s just me
    1,280 of 6,578 = 20% — what the other 80% reasons
    they had for not voting we will never know — it seems
    people only care when it’s about who will be president
    once every 4 yrs

  7. Voting did not require an ID check so I’m wondering how the identity of said Republicans was even verified? If some were ID checked, it was not consistent. Couldn’t anyone have voted in place of their friends on vacation? Just saying….

    • I worked at one of the ‘intake’ tables and I can assure you that my partner and I scrutinized the driver’s license of every person who came to our station–even when we knew that person. Some voters were taken a bit aback by this, but we assured them it was as necessary at a caucus as it is at the polls in November. Obviously, I cannot speak to the check-in procedures used by other workers. I would have assumed we were all on the same page about this, but apparently not.

  8. Yes Kimberly — I took out my driver lic — but they said we don’t need that to my surprise — The country is a funny place — the
    Republican are looking into voter fraud on a national level
    and the democrats — say 1 million people have un registered
    because of it — this is a very odd statement to make
    what do these 1 million care about that they would do that ?
    Your name and address and your claim to be a citizen
    we live in interesting times !!!

  9. WOW– just saw Hacking Democracy!!!!! netflix
    about how safe the election process is — we know whenever people
    are involved in anything there could be problems — This movie show how the people who make the new voting machines lied to us
    This movie was looking at the 2004 election — whatever their bias
    they have uncovered a disturbing set of facts — you should watch it
    and also the deleted scenes — there are 3 major new voting machine
    used in the US — they focus on one — I was a it security person for many yrs — the only secure system is one that is locked in a room
    with no outside access — These scanning machine use memory cards that keeps count of the votes –then are collected and fed into
    a machine that takes the info from the cards and prints out a total
    and then the machine is hooked up to a computer that adds all the results — but these memory card have software on them
    that allows the votes to be changed –WOW!!!
    the hacker took the card made changes to it then gave the card to the election person who put it in the machine — then they cast
    9 separate votes on scan ballets — 7 no votes and 2 yes votes
    it came back 8 yes and 1 no — This is scary stuff !!!!
    not that it happen but that it could happen — forget about
    hackers — it’s the company who could control the process
    and we all know how we can trust companies and their
    employees — why they would put this code on the memory
    card is beyond reason — maybe we should go back to the old machines — one thing about this movie is you see that people
    who ask questions are the cornerstone of Democracy

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *