NEWS RELEASE:
10/08/2005 CFABA.ORG 'Report Card' Of
How California Counties Did Providing Candidate Lists.
For Immediate Release:
Contact Robert Colaco at (818)757-1776.
Saturday, October 08, 2005
CFABA.ORG completes sending out their candidate
questionnaires and gives a complete 'Report Card' of
how each California County did in providing candidate lists.
Citizens For A Better America ® (CFABA.ORG) is
a national, grassroots, nonconnected, independent,
political committee established on October 15, 1992
whose primary focus is to elect morality and values
based candidates from the very lowest to the very
highest political positions all over the U.S.A. It is
not controlled or authorized by any candidate or
their committee(s). All expenses are paid for by
Citizens For A Better America®.
Volunteer National Chairman and Founder of
Citizens For A Better America® (CFABA.ORG),
Robert Colaco, commented:
"One of the goals of Citizens For A Better America ®
is to improve the entire election process. This is not an
easy goal to achieve. One of the ways to achieve this goal
is to improve the process by which candidates for office
communicate with their constituency and their constituency
communicate with them.
We believe strongly that one of the ways that is achieved
is by having easy access to candidate contact information
such as phone numbers, email and website addresses.
To this end we have been encouraging election officials at
all levels of government all across the United States of
America to provide this information to the voters. We are
thrilled and delighted when they do, we are
disappointed when they do not. This 'Report Card' is an
attempt to begin the process of making public how
specifically the election officials do on making this
information available to the voters.
In this case, we have focused on California Counties
and what they did for their voter for the November 8, 2005
election. We visited the various California Counties Election
Websites two weeks after the close for filing had expired.
It was our experience that some election officials post these
list even earlier then close of filing, some post it as the
candidates are filing. We wanted to have complete lists
so we chose to waited for the close of filing to pass and
time for the lists to be posted.
The following California counties had websites with
candidate lists that also had e-mail addresses on their
lists for one or more candidates, or they sent us a list with
email addresses. These counties received a grade of 'C' or
better, check the 'Report Card' below for
their grades. This is the order they were contacted in.
S01.
Los Angeles County List -
352 questionnaires were sent on 08/09/2005 and 09/20/2005.
S02. Ventura County List -
16 questionnaires were sent on 09/20/2005.
S03. Fresno County List -
08 questionnaires were sent on 09/20/2005.
S04. San Mateo County List -
118 questionnaires were sent on 09/20/2005.
S05. Marin County List -
28 questionnaires were sent on 09/20/2005.
S06. Sonoma County List -
05 questionnaires were sent on 09/20/2005. Sonoma County sent us a list but did not post it to their website,
so we have converted it to PDF format and posted it to our website.
S07. Mendocino County List -
35 questionnaires were sent on 09/20/2005. Mendocino County sent us a list but did not post it to their
website, so we have converted it to PDF format and posted it to our website.
S08. San Joaquin County List -
09 questionnaires were sent on 10/08/2005.
S09. Monterey County List -
45 questionnaires were sent on 10/08/2005.
S10. City & County of San Francisco List -
08 questionnaires were sent on 10/08/2005.
Aside from Los Angeles County with 352 emails sent, there were a total
of 272 questionnaire's that we e-mailed out to the candidates
in the nine (9) other California Counties listed above.
We are often asked, What about all the
other 48 counties in California, besides Los Angeles?
So we decided it was time to do a 'Report Card' on
just how well those election officials were doing in making it
easy to find out who was running and on how to contact those
that were.
We have listed below all of the Counties in California and what was
the status of their websites when we went looking for candidate
lists with clickable email addresses, and the grade we gave
them for providing information for this Nov. 8 2005 California Special Election.
First, we used the page on the California Secretary of
State's website as our guide. Their website had a listing
of the various "County Elections Officials" with email and
website addresses for each if supplied. We examined
the websites of those counties that had websites, checking
for a candidate list with clickable email addresses (this in
addition name, addresses and phone number) for this
Nov. 8 2005 election. Second, we sent via email on
08/15/2005 An Open Letter Requesting Candidate Lists
to all the counties where we had been unable to locate a
candidate list on their websites.
As we used the page on the California Secretary of State's
website as our guide. The county number is the number
the California Secretary of State's webpage lists as a number.
The California Secretary of State's webpage we used is located at:
[http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/elections_d.htm]
Report Card
Co.
No. |
County Name |
Status When Reviewed |
CFABA.ORG Grade |
| 01. |
Alameda County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
| 02. |
Alpine County |
Sent us a Candidate List, only had two candidates for office,
both without email addresses. |
Grade = C |
| 03. |
Amador County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
| 04. |
Butte County |
Did not have email addresses on their candidate lists. |
Grade = C |
| 05. |
Calaveras County |
Did not have email addresses on their candidate lists. |
Grade = C |
| 06. |
Colusa County |
No election other than the special statewide election. |
Grade = N/A |
| 07. |
Contra Costa |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
| 08. |
Del Norte County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
| 09. |
El Dorado County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
| 10. |
Fresno County |
Had Candidate List on their Website with clickable email addresses but used a PDF formatted page instead of an HTML formatted page.
Please see S03 above. |
Grade = B |
| 11. |
Glenn County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
| 12. |
Humboldt County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
| 13. |
Imperial County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
| 14. |
Inyo County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
| 15. |
Kern County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
They responded with:
"We do not post the list of candidates until between the
40th and 30th day before the election." |
Grade = D |
| 16. |
Kings County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
| 17. |
Lake County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
| 18. |
Lassen County |
They collect email addresses from their
candidates but do not post them. |
Grade = C |
| 19. |
Los Angeles County |
This is the very best example of what we would
like every county to do. They post their list on their
website. They have clickable website and email
addresses for their candidates. We continue to
appreciate how Conny B. McCormack,
Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk has worked
with us to make their candidate list the best in the USA.
Please see S01 above. |
Grade = A |
| 20. |
Madera County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
They faxed it to us.
It was unusable when we received it. |
Grade = D |
| 21. |
Marin County |
Had Candidate List on their Website with clickable email addresses but used a PDF formatted page instead of an HTML formatted page.
Please see S05 above. |
Grade = B |
| 22. |
Mariposa County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
| 23. |
Mendocino County |
Sent us a Candidate List with email addresses.
Please see S07 above. |
Grade = C |
| 24. |
Merced County |
Did not have email addresses on their candidate lists. |
Grade = C |
| 25. |
Modoc County |
Website=[NONE LISTED] |
Grade = F |
| 26. |
Mono County |
Website=[NONE LISTED] |
Grade = F |
| 27. |
Monterey County |
Had Candidate List on their website in a HTML formatted page with email addresses but they were not clickable.
Please see S09 above. |
Grade = B |
| 28. |
Napa County |
Did not have candidate list on website. |
Grade = D |
| 29. |
Nevada County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
| 30. |
Orange County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
| 31. |
Placer County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
| 32. |
Plumas County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
| 33. |
Riverside County |
Did not give email address to Secretary of State.
No information about candidates other than just the candidate name. |
Grade = F |
| 34. |
Sacramento County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
| 35. |
San Benito County |
Website=[NONE LISTED] |
Grade = F |
| 36. |
San Bernardino County |
Did not have email addresses on their candidate lists. |
Grade = C |
| 37. |
San Diego County |
They responded with: "The Registrar of Voters does
not have a candidate list for the November, 2005 election.
The City of San Diego has candidates and their candidate list..."
The City of San Diego did not have email addresses for their
candidates, just websites. It is our policy not to go looking
at websites for email addresses, it is too time consuming. |
Grade = C |
| 38. |
City & County of San Francisco |
Had Candidate List on their Website with clickable email addresses but used a PDF formatted page instead of an HTML formatted page.
Please see S10 above. |
Grade = B |
| 39. |
San Joaquin County |
Had Candidate List on their Website with clickable email addresses but used a PDF formatted page instead of an HTML formatted page.
Please see S08 above. |
Grade = B |
| 40. |
San Luis Obispo County |
Did not have email addresses on their candidate lists. |
Grade = C |
| 41. |
San Mateo County |
Had Candidate List on their Website with clickable email addresses but used a PDF formatted page instead of an HTML formatted page.
Please see S04 above. |
Grade = B |
| 42. |
Santa Barbara |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
| 43. |
Santa Clara County |
Did not have email addresses on their candidate lists. |
Grade = C |
| 44. |
Santa Cruz County |
Did not have email addresses on their candidate lists. |
Grade = C |
| 45. |
Shasta County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
| 46. |
Sierra County |
They responded with: "We do not have any candidates
for upcoming November 8, 2005 election."
|
Grade = N/A |
| 47. |
Siskiyou County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
| 48. |
Solano County |
Candidate list only had names on it. |
Grade = C |
| 49. |
Sonoma County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
They sent us a Candidate List with email addresses.
Please see S06 above. |
Grade = C |
| 50. |
Stanislaus County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
They sent us a list but it did not have email addresses. |
Grade = D |
| 51. |
Sutter County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not give email address to Secretary of State. |
Grade = F |
| 52. |
Tehama County |
They responded with: "We are not putting a candidates
list on the web page this time because none of the few
candidates that we have for our special districts signed
the waiver so we could post them on the web page." |
Grade = C |
| 53. |
Trinity County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
| 54. |
Tulare County |
Did not have email addresses on their candidate lists. |
Grade = C |
| 55. |
Tuolumne County |
Website=[NONE LISTED] |
Grade = F |
| 56. |
Ventura County |
Had Candidate List on their Website with clickable email addresses but used a PDF formatted page instead of an HTML formatted page.
Please see S02 above. |
Grade = B |
| 57. |
Yolo County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
| 58. |
Yuba County |
No Candidate List on their Website.
Did not respond to our request for a list. |
Grade = F |
Grading system used by CFABA.ORG:
Grade A (Best) = All contact information available for voters.
Such as full mailing address, phone number, email and
website address. Email and website addresses are
clickable within an Internet browser. All of this information is
posted on their Internet website as an HTML formatted webpage
rather than some other format like a PDF file.
Grade B = Had Candidate List on their Website with
clickable email addresses but used a PDF formatted page
instead of an HTML formatted page. This means users must
download a PDF reader to be able to view the webpage. If
they used a HTML formatted page then the email addresses
were not clickable.
Grade C = They had a candidate list but it did not have email
addresses. Or they had to send us their list of candidates via
email and that list had email addresses on it.
Grade D = They did not have a candidate list on their website,
and they could only send us the list either by fax or regular mail
instead of by email. This meant they only had paper copies of
their lists and were not thinking of their constitutes who use the
Internet as a main source for getting information. Or, if they could
send it via email the list did not contain email addresses.
Grade F (Worst) = Did not have any kind of a candidate list
on their website or did not have a website. When requested
to provide either a link to where it is on their website or a list
they "Did not respond to our request." The counties that did
not have an email or website address on the California
Secretary of State's webpage [http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/elections_d.htm]
are receiving an F Grade as well, because it demonstrates a
lack of interest in constitutes who use the Internet as a main
source for getting information.
Grade N/A = Did not have an election, there was no way to see what
grade they would be given.
A total of twenty six (25) counties did not respond to our
request sent on 08/15/2005 An Open Letter Requesting Candidate Lists.
The bottom line is they ignored us. That is forty
four percent (44%) of California County Registrar
Recorder / County Clerks did not even have the courtesy
to send us a simple email. We are extremely disappointed
with the counties that did not respond to our request. They
received a Grade of F, for failure.
It is our goal continue to do this same kind of 'Report Card' on
all election officials in all 50 states, the District of Columbia
and the U.S. Territories of AMERICAN SAMOA, GUAM,
PUERTO RICO, and the US VIRGIN ISLANDS.
If you are a registered voter in one of the counties
receiving less than an 'A grade', we would encourage
you to contact your county officials and encourage them
to improve.
Or, if you are an official in one of the counties receiving
less than an 'A grade', we would encourage you to improve.
If you are an election official somewhere outside of
California and you know that you would not receive an
'A grade' then we would encourage you to improve, since
soon we may be grading your website like we have done here.
We want to see election officials using the Internet to its fullest.
Voters use the Internet, so election officials should make it
easier for them to find the information they need. Any election official who
doesn't use the Internet to its fullest is behind the times, the
voters expect more and these officials should change or be replaced," said Colaco.
###
This is the end of News Release from Citizens For A Better America ® (CFABA.ORG).
If you use this story or link to it, we would appreciate you sending us a notice. Thank you!
Last Update: 06/21/2018
| 
Site Directory
