also be submitted electronically via email at response at ocgov.com. Good morning and let's come to order. Good morning colleagues and ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the meeting of the Orange County Board of Supervisors for December 4, 2024. 2024 will begin our meeting with the invocation to be led by Supervisors Sarmianto and the Pledge of Allegiance led by Supervisor Foley. We invite all of you willing and able to please stand and join us. Good morning everybody. I'll ask that if you can please join me in bowing your heads as we reflect. As we come together today, let us take a moment to reflect and renew. We pause to give thanks for the opportunity to start fresh, to lead behind what no longer serves us and to embrace the potential of what lies ahead. May this time of gathering inspire clarity, purpose, and renewed energy in our work and in our hearts. Let us be open to new ideas, to growth, and to the power of collaboration. May our conversations and decisions reflect a spirit of optimism, understanding, and collective strength. As we move forward together, may we find the courage to reimagine possibilities, and the wisdom to nurture the positive change we wish to see. In this moment of renewal, we are reminded of the boundless opportunities to create, to learn, and to make a difference. Let our work today be a reflection of the bright future we can build together. Amen. And if you're able, please say with me, I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Thank you everyone and a couple of quick reminders. We have only one item on the calendar today. It is the item as Posted in the notice we will consider that item and If you wish to address the board, please complete a speak request form located in the lobby outside the board room. Completed forms must be deposited in the box next to the podium prior to the calling of the item. Speakers may address the board as this is the only item once with one minute allotted per speaker per occasion. When you're called to step, please step to the podium. We requested to state your name and city of residents for the record. We ask also that you, when addressing the board, address the board as a whole through the chair. And with that, Madam Clerk, I ask you to identify any changes to the agenda and any request received from the public to pull an item well. There's no consent, so never mind. Let's move to item one and Madam Clerk, if you would read. Under the register of voters, receive and file certification of election results in statement of votes cast for an remember fifth, 2024 presidential general election. And declare elected the person's having a majority votes for that office. And Mr. Chairman, I received. 25 requests to speak on. I'll call three speakers at a time. Please line up in the center of the room when your name is called Eileen McDermott, Nicholas, Dibs, Sam Brown. Was injured by an IED and has many repairative surgeries and lost his brother from injuries to Afghanistan war. I saw none of you there. What has happened to the USA has been a slow infiltration, implementation, instead of infiltration, infiltration, instead of an invasion. I would rather call it an infestation of all federal state county and city agencies. Manipulation by unconstitutional regulations rules voting apparatus, mail-in voting, worst of all, on toward individuals who have been selected instead of elected, who have their best interest instead of weaver people. I ask you, I advise you to not certify this election and because it's unconstitutional and illegal. Many practices, many rules, regulations are unconstitutional. So I'm- Thank you very much. Next speaker please. Please line up in the center of the room. Nicholas Dibbs, Victor and Kate. Before you start my time, I was told I'd have three minutes to speak. We've got enough speakers, it's a special meeting. We've got other obligations, folks have got. So we're going to do it one more time. Well, one minute is not enough, Mr. Chairman, and I am here because taxpayer dollars that were used by some unscrupulous administrators at Garden Grove Unified School District to influence voters. Now, we just finished, you're in an investigation on Andrew Doe misused taxpayer dollars. Taxpayer dollars have been misused by the school district to influence voters, both before and after the ballots went out. I have the evidence. I'm asking you to pull this one election from certification and table it or put it on hold until you can send this to the Orange County DA to investigate it. I have the evidence. The DA needs to look into this or the DOJ. Please pull this item because we're supposed to have checks and balances in this country. This shouldn't just be a rubber stamp. I have the evidence, they misused taxpayer dollars sent out thousands and thousands of emails before and after the election to in favor of the incumbent with taxpayer dollars. This is wrong, please pull it, It's Garden Grove Unified School District. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker please. I'm Victor from RSM and basically in all projects, you do a reassessment of a project to make sure the yield is there. And you do continuous improvement just as Vicente Sarmiento had invocated. We want to go forward and we want to look forward. And basically, we are at a point in time where the VCA has to be renewed or not renewed. We need to look at the facts. We need to look at what has happened in order to move forward and improve what we're doing. It's impossible to verify signatures as is. Verification with birthday and address is weak to say the least. Voters Choice Act allows people from different counties to go on ahead and submit. Thereby, making it longer to go on ahead and count the votes. Election budgets have increased over 77%, which was not the original boards in 2019's intent. Thank you very much. Speaker, please. The next speaker is David Hillberg, Nicole and Rodney Ellen Ribby. Good morning, board. It looks like we're in a pickle today. So we know that this election should not be certified. One, because the Democrat nominee was never on any ballot to be on the presidential ballot. To RFK was on my ballot, he left the race in August of 2023. Why was he on my ballot? He announced that all his votes are a vote for Trump. Has all his votes gone to Trump? So United Sovereign Americans analyzed the 2022 election, found 25% error rate. Have you cleaned up our voter rolls since 2022? So this board, can you attest that there is no more than one in 25,000 ballots in error? Thank you very much. Next speaker please. Good morning. My name is David Hilberg, pass candidate for governor and lieutenant governor. I would like to ask Bob Page to stand up and recognize himself. He has allowed the administrative staff of the ROV to violate election law upon myself during the 2022 election. And by not having enough compulsory staff during the canvas and count of the votes. I walked the halls of that facility. Station number 14 and number eight were passing ballots between seven o'clock and six o'clock in the evening on November 9th. Now, 60% of the stations were not covered by observers. 10% of those observers knew what they were looking for. I went a lawful and constitutional election. I ran as a lieutenant governor and saw election law being violated. You have my email. Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please. Hello, my name is Nicole Hamis. And I'm a parent out of Garden Gribbon Pride School Districts. I have kids, three kids who are in special education. And so I've been spending a lot of time focusing on the ed code violations as they violate our rights. And I found they're actually doing that in our local elections as well. Ed Code 7054 says that school districts cannot use funds to support if any ballot measure or candidate. And that's what they've been doing since 2016. They have been using public funds to send out robocalls and print flyers against candidates that they have not selected. So I really feel like this should be investigated. These are our public money and the school district should not be able to use our money to choose who they want to sit on the school board. Thank you for your time. Thank you. After Rodney Ellen Ripy, the next three speakers, if you can line up in the center of the room, are Mary, Deborah P and Cheryl. Good morning, supervisor. We wanted to say thank you for this opportunity. I was actually a supporter of Nick Dib's working on his election. And we really feel that this is like a 60 yard dash and the gun goes off and someone took off before the actual race. This is what's been happening with Nick. I personally was on a team. We put out close to 4,500 door to door. I mean knocking, handshake, and a lot of people in the community wanted to see the trades come back. Nick has been working on this for eight years. And now that this is actually happening, he's not getting any credit for all the work that he's done. He's been around a lot of community events. And I just think that they really do need to look at this election, look at the votes, and have this thing pulled and stayed until the district attorney can really take a look at it and, look at the votes, and have this thing pulled and stayed until the district attorney can really take a look at it and see if this was a true and fair election. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Next speaker please. The Barney, we do need a fair election. The voter rolls must be accurate according to the National Voter Registration Act. We had 5,886,198 in eligible votes. Excuse me, or uncertain registration violations found within the California State Voter Roll database. The votes must be counted. They must be eligible voters according to to the US Constitution. There were 2,776,939 votes that were cast by ineligible or uncertain registrants. The number of votes counted must be equal to the number of votes who voted. There were 123,785 more votes counted than voters who voted. Nobody knows who cast them. There can be no more than 125,000 ballots in error by the voting system. There were 2,776,849 apparent voting violations in excess of the legal standard of accuracy. Maximum allowance for this 2022 election was 90. And it was similar in this election as well. Thank you very much. Thank you. Good morning supervisors. My name is Deborah Polly. I'm an attorney with the Lex Rex Institute. We are legal counsel to a group of concerned citizens advocating for transparency and legal compliance in the renewal of Orange County's participation in the voters choice act, VCA. These are reasonable people, educated people, professionals, they don't have time to be here today. Many people want to blame the current ROV for the hot mess our elections have become. I'm not sure he is too blame, because he has been charged with implementing what can only be described as a failed experiment. You have the power and authority to unravel that experiment in the 2025-2029 election cycle. I urge you to require the registrar voters to mail postcards to every registered voter, and notifying them of scheduled public hearings, conduct multiple hearings, and provide ample opportunity for public input, valid public input, as you seek to unravel this hot mess. Thank you. Thank you. Next week, please. After Cheryl, the next three speakers are Kevin Mills, Lurson Russell, and George. Good morning. This election reporting has some serious flaws. First of all, the registrar is saying that we had 1,861,450 registrations. According to the ROV data, as of the same date, they are showing that there is 1,9133 registrations. That's a difference of 39,585 registrations. They say they've counted a certain number of ballots, and yet according to the ROV data, they only received, they're actually counting 311,796 more ballots than what were returned. As terms of issued versus registrations, they've issued 325,110 more ballots than what were returned than registrations. There are many races that were lost 28 days after the election. And the real thing here is that with all these, the presidential votes received 26,090 less votes than what they are trying to certify here today. There is a serious problem. Certification of a false, Cali is a federal offense. Thank you, next speaker please. Thank you. Kevin Mills, good morning. I stand an objection to certifying this election in light of at least one fact. There were more ballots cast from undeliverable addresses than the difference in many races. The ROV is doing their best to adhere to California law. However, these laws violate constitutional rights according to at least the 14th amendment as executed. I urge you to investigate before certifying. Thank you, next speaker please. to the people of Orange County. Because clearly this board has no interest in actually our elections and the integrity of them. There's the issues that are going on right now is the central to controlled system through the state that's pushing it on the county. Bob Page and the team down there are doing their absolute best job. But when you've got a million ballots to process with signatures and all the different touch points and scans and flattening and duplication, we duplicated 70 to 75,000 ballots out of the votes that were turned in. That is just ridiculous that you all continue to support a system like that. You are able to make a defense because you're not aware of how these systems are. You weren't down there with 120 observers over four weeks, documenting all the duplications and signature verification in the dozens and dozens and dozens of steps. We need to go back to common sense, community, local voting. Period. Next speaker please. Thank you very much. After George, the next three speakers are Carolyn Adamic, voter Pete and Sonia Green. George, Carolyn Adamic, voter Pete and Sonia Green. I'm going to go to the next slide. George, Carolyn, Adam, Voter, Pete, and Sonia Green. If your name is called, come on up. We'll get everybody to see. I'll just make it simple because you're manipulating the system. I was here in March. I was in March complaining about I was getting my, this is my actual physical address. I somehow the motorboat or DMV, what they do is they default your ballot to an address on your license. What it is is my license has a PO box. I continue asking this board. I use the system online to change my address. Believe it or not, my address never changed to the day after the voting. This is a ballot from a totally different precinct. This is from precinct. Come on, let's give me the projection. Come on. Your manipulating system basically. Your whole system is so full of holes, it looks like Swiss cheese. Thank you. Thank you. Let's think of these. Good morning. My name is Carolyn Adamic. I'm hoping you won't certify this election, at least the election regarding Michelle Steele and Derek Tran. Duplication of ballots can lead to errors and fraud. Any time a ballot is hand or digitally duplicated, it is manipulated by human resulting in risk for error or fraud. And I and other observers at the ROV saw this. What fraud at the ROV? How can I impune the ethics of some ROV saw this. What fraud at the ROV? How can I impure the ethics of some ROV employees? Just as the ROV management about the employee caught changing the vote from RFK to Harris. Anyway, the question is, could that manipulation opportunity of duplication affect the outcome of a race? I was told by Bob, a lead employee at the ROV that all the Korean and Chinese ballots are duplicated because they are not scannable. The Chinese and Korean language are not scannable by the Novus system. And, well, gosh, if all the Korean and Chinese ballots are duplicated, and none of the Vietnamese ballots are duplicated, it's next speaker, please. Thank you. I'm Sonia Green. I'm against the certification of the election. I sent approximately 15 to 20 observers to the ROV office, where they have witnessed ballots that's being passed through. Signatures were not matching. When they were brought that to the attention of the supervisors, they were either removed as being observers or just discounted. So I urge you not to certify this election on account of so many nefarious things that were happening again with duplicated ballots and other sources that other people have already mentioned. Thank you very much. After George, the next three speakers are Mark T. James P. And Rosario. George Mark T. James P. And Rosario. Good morning. So I was a candidate I ran against your friend, Christina, Mayor Stevens. And some of the things that I saw very disturbed me about this election, you know, it looked like after election day, the voting centers were still counting, in fact, in Costa Mesa. There were another 1100 votes that came in through the voting centers, even though they were closed. And I think that was the most important thing to do. I think that's what I'm going to do. Election Day, the voting centers are still counting. In fact, in Costa Mesa, there were another 1100 votes that came in through the voting centers, even though they were closed. For the county was 33,000. So, it's hard to have a little election when we have fraud like that occurring. But also, over 300,000 ballots mailed out, then we had registered voters in the county. And for Costa Mesa, there were 13,000 mailed at more than registered voters in the county and for Costa Mesa there were 13,000 mailed at more than registered voters. So when we see on the 6th, the Secretary states saying that there's 800,000 ballots in the system for vote by mail, there's 13,000 left to count. And then suddenly on the 9th after the bomb scare, now that we're up to 1 going to be going to be going to Mark Tachovich, I'm assuming Mark T. Voting is very important. That's why it took time to go observe. First thing I noticed was a signature verification is just completely subjective. And it's so important to vote right, yet we're counting on someone to say, what that looks close enough, let it go. We need to go back to a picture ID to eliminate all that. The other problem I saw is a duplicate ballots. Thousands and thousands and thousands of them. Why? If someone can't read the instructions on the ballot that's very clear and decisive, says, fill in the rectangle with a black pen. Instead, they use a check mark or an X. That ballot should just be invalidated. Voter rows were they clean since the last election I haven't heard or seen anything like that and by God it takes 67 days for our election cycle how much money is that? Other other places are counting in a day and we're taking what almost a month. Thank you for your time. Thank you very much. Next speaker please. Next speaker is Esther David H and Robert B. Next speaker is Jose A. This may be a duplicate. I'd like to speak. Mr. Chairman, all names have been called. If you'd like me to repeat the news. We have somebody coming down the aisle. Is your name been called? All right, come on. Okay, how many missiles there cost the. You smell that? I smell a rotting crime scene. And we're actually seeing you guys not doing shit to help us out. You smell that? I smell a rotting crime scene. And we're actually seeing you guys not doing shit to help the community here and the constituents. Because we know the data shows there's fraud. It's plain and simple. And I see nothing but government gangsters in place here. And not doing shit. You know, so just so you know, by God's grace, we got President Trump at the helm at President. So you don't think that these crimes are not gonna be uncovered, because guess who's gonna be the head by director, Caspatel, and just expect prosecution's, just because this is a federal election. You think you guys gonna be easily covering your asses with your criminality? No, you guys are not to be easily covering your asses with your criminality? No. You guys are not going to get away with it. If you guys don't realize, you guys have been observed. You guys who was inspired by today on Steve Bann's War Room, Orange County. Thank you very much. I'll speak as I've been called. Mr. Chairman, all names have been called. All right. Let me bring this back to the board at this point and I will first of all want to call up Mr. Page. And there have been some questions, some challenges, thoughts, responses, answers to some of those charges, agreements, disagreements. Let us tell us why asked to certify the election. I certify the election yesterday. The board is merely being asked to receive my certification and declare the winner of the first district supervisor contest. Regarding things like signature verification, we follow the law. So there are very specific regulations regarding signature verification, which includes starting with the assumption that the signature is at the voter signature. Quiet please, we'll have order. Well, he listened quietly while you spoke, you will do the same or I'll clear the room. Go ahead. Then we are required to look for similarities in the signature. We are not required to follow, find a exact match of the signature on the envelope with the signature that's on file and registration. But it does require three members of our staff to make a agree on finding that the signature's different significantly enough to challenge the signature. Then if we find that the signatures are not similar in any way, we are required to mail a first-class letter to that voter, informing them of that decision and giving them an opportunity to cure that signature issue. Same is true if they forget to sign the envelope. We're required to notify them. We also, if they provided their phone number or email address as part of the registration process, we're required to call or email them as well. If they sign up for ballot tracking services, they'll get a notification that their ballot's been challenged. And for this election, the legislature passed urgency legislation that, when it effect in September, that required me to provide all voters with a challenge ballot until this past Sunday, December 1st at 5 p.m. to try to cure that. And prohibited me from certifying the election before yesterday. So regarding the questions about why it's so long, I was following state law in making sure that we were accurately counting the ballots and providing voters the amount of time that the legislature determined they should have to cure a signature issue. There are also some questions about the accuracy of our voter rolls and asking when was the last time we cleaned the voter rolls. As I've mentioned to the board before, voter registration maintenance is a daily activity. We are required under state law within five business days of receiving information from the voter or an official government source that we need to update their voter record. Somebody mentioned address issues with a DMV. If they update their voter registration through our office or with the sector of state. And then the next time they do something at the DMV, they do have the option of opting out so the DMV does not change their address. But if they find the DMV action they've taken has caused an issue, they can immediately correct that with our office or online with the sector of state to update their registration. Were there other specific questions? Talk to us about Garden Grove, What you've heard about that. Well, with Garden Grove, as I mentioned to the gentleman that I believe was the candidate, was that this board is receiving the certification of the election in Orange County, which does include that contest, but you're not actually certifying it. And you're not declaring the winner. So we will, by tomorrow, send to the Garden Grove School District the certified results for their election. And then their board will have to take the same action you're taking today to declare the winner. I've mentioned to him that if he believes that they violated the law and used taxpayer money to influence that election that he should contact the district attorney's office and have them investigate that, or he could also contact the Secretary of State for them to investigate that. That myself as a registered voters, I have no enforcement or investigatory or regulatory authority. I am an administrative election, so that's why I referred him to the DA or the Secretary of State to look into that. Is it true that we need to duplicate ballots that are in languages other than perhaps English and Spanish as we heard and did or didn't with respect to Vietnamese, etc? That's not my understanding. I know in the primary we did have a couple of ballot rolls that we printed that were not as clear as they should have been, so they weren't being accepted by the scanners, so we did have to duplicate. And one of those roles included some language ballots on it, so every ballot that was printed in the primary had to, that wasn't the case, we based on the experience in the primary with the printing issues, with a couple of the ballot roles that we printed, we added additional quality assurance checks as part of the process, which included every hundredth ballot we print before it's actually sealed in an envelope. We're pulling it out. We're looking at the barcode under a photographer's loop, a magnifying loop, to look for any kind of abnormal sees. And if it looks in any way off, we were then test scanning it to see if it would be rejected or not. When we found out enough ballots within a role were being rejected in the printing process, we were reprinting that and throwing out the ballots that weren't passing. So we didn't have the same issues in this election. Though I, in the news I did hear there were some other counties in the state that had that same scan rejection issues, Shasta County Nevada County. When ballots were duplicated, because it wouldn't scan, are there observers to that process? Yes, so there are as a couple steps in duplication. So you've got one person who's actually transferring the votes from the ballot that could not be scanned or had damage to it it or as was mentioned, there are some voters who will do a check mark who may write yes within the box rather than filling it in. And so there's somebody who is duplicating those votes over. We're about to suggest and let me interrupt with respect to the check marks or somebody writes yes. Yeah. Recommendation from the audience was throw that ballot out. State law does not allow me to do that. The state law specifically says that even if a voter does not follow the instructions, if the intent of their vote is clear and they were consistent on how they missmarked the ballot, we do count those votes. We remake their ballot and count those votes. So somebody wrote yes in a box on everyone that they wanted to vote for. We, that intent of the voter was clear, they were consistent about how they filled out that ballot. So we're required by state law to remake that ballot onto a new ballot that can be scanned. Okay. And so there's somebody who does the remaking, they copy the votes over, but then there's a second person who audits that work. So they'll look at the original ballot and the remade ballot and make sure that the first person copied the votes over correctly. So if somebody believes that they saw somebody switch votes on there, that would be caught at the next step when the person audited the work that the person remaking the ballot did. Thank you. Anything further with respect to what you heard today to address? No, I know that we did have a lot of observers and we are always going to be transparent and welcome observers to watch our processes. We do our best to explain what we're doing, what state laws, when they're there, answer their questions. But I know that there are people in this community who believe strongly about how we conduct elections. But that's not something that you or I can change in terms of state law. That's something that Sacramento would have to make a decision to change the way elections are conducted. All right. Thank you very much, colleagues. Questions? Comments, anyone? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Page as well. So what we're being asked to do today, you've already certified these races yesterday with the exception. You certified all of them, but today we're simply going to accept the results or validate the results from the district one supervisorial election. Correct, yes. I was required under state law to certify the presidential contest by yesterday and all other local contest and state contest by tomorrow. Obviously, we're all those contests are on one ballot so it doesn't really make sense to meet it to certify twice. So we certify everything yesterday. And then state law requires that each jurisdiction that has an election on the ballot that I send the result, certified results to that governing body of that jurisdiction, so that that jurisdiction can declare the winner of whatever election is under their jurisdiction. So for this election, for the Board of Supervisors, the sole election on this ballot that's under your jurisdiction, was the runoff election, the first Essex Supervisors contest. Got it. So the question about Garden Grove unified, that will go to that body. Correct. For them to go ahead and certify the results in that. To clear the winter in that contest, yes. Clear. Okay. Thank you for that. And back to the intent language that the state gives you. What are those, what's the legislative history or the purpose for that intent being broad? Because I mean, I could see maybe somebody who's disabled, somebody who's a senior, somebody who has cerebral palsy. You know, I know there are plenty of reasons why maybe somebody can't fill out that box as clearly as maybe some of us could. Yeah, the state law really has a foundation on access and helping voters exercise their right to vote. So they make allowances for somebody, you know, if they forget to sign the envelope, they just don't automatically reject it. You give that voter a chance to correct that error. If somebody is not able to physically mark about easily, we provide all the other options. If they come in vote in person, we've had to have an accessible ballot marking device with a touch screen where they can fill on the squares and a principle ballot that can be scanned. If they can't get to a vote center, there's something called remote accessible vote by mail, which they can pull up a ballot on their computer market and then print it and mail it in like a vote by mail ballot. Quiet please please. Continue. I will clear the room. We are not going to take out first from the audience. Be quiet, please. Continue. So there's opportunities that in access that we provide to people that can't physically mark about themselves so they can do that. But some people still want to have that experience so they'll mark it. So the state provides under those uniform vote counting standards that if somebody doesn't follow the instructions to fill in the square but their intent is clear as to who they were voting for say they, some people will circle a name rather than filling in the square. Some people will do a check mark. some people will write yes next to a name some people will rewrite the pert the candidates name in the in the right in mark space so as long as they're their intense clear and their consistent on how they mark their ballot we are required to remake that ballot so it can be scanned, moving those votes over to a new ballot. Thank you for that. Thank you super-rights Foley. Thank you and thank you Mr. Page. I know that your team has been working really hard and I want to thank all of the registrar voters, employees, both permanent and temporary extra help, because the amount of effort to count all the votes, to host all of the vote centers, and to get all the printing done every different phase of the election is an enormous challenge, and we appreciate the employees that have worked so hard and so diligently and with such commitment to the county to a election integrity. So thank you on behalf of our office and the board. Thank you. Also, just we've heard the speakers today, as you indicated, we are only certifying the election for District 1. State Senator Janet Wynn has won that election. She'll be joining us on the board after we certify this today. I didn't hear any one complain that her votes were fraudulent or we haven't had any complaints about that. Okay. Excuse me. And so, look, I supported some candidates. They lost. I supported some candidates. They won. I mean, that's politics, right? And so, I think that we have to accept the elections. Order please, order please. Go ahead, continue. I will, as soon as they're quiet. And so, you know, can you describe for us what is the procedure because of course we don't have authority over any violations related to whether it's garden grove or whether it's the Congress or any of these seats. What is the procedure that an individual who has a concern and alleged evidence that they can take to whom and to what do they do? Yeah, so the district attorney's office actually has a unit specifically focused to whom and to what do they do? Yeah, so the district attorney's office actually has a unit specifically focused on election law violations. We provide on our website as well as other information about how to contact them. They have an email address and a phone number. They, I believe that their office takes these allegations seriously. They actually prosecuted several people just before the election. A couple candidates who signed under penalty perjury that they had circulated their nomination signatures when they, in fact, hadn't. They also prosecuted a gentleman who voted in 2016 without being a citizen and all three of those people played guilty. So I know that they do those investigations. We also every election, if we believe there's strong evidence that somebody purposely tried to vote twice, we will forward that information, the district attorney, to look into. They've not actually prosecuted any of those people. I think once they contact those people and talk to them, they make the decision that the intent wasn't there, and they don't move forward with any kind of prosecution. But we'll continue when we see things like that, we'll provide that to the district attorney. The district attorney has that prosecutal authority about whether to pursue it or not. So I'm going to respect his team and his authorities to make those decisions. But if anybody comes to me and says that they believe that somebody's violated elections law, I'm gonna make sure that I refer them to provide that information to the district attorney's office. Not again, sir, not again. You will be removed from this room. All right, remove yourself, that's even better. Finally, please. Thank you, Mr. Page. And Mr. Page. I wonder why nobody voted for an emperor governor. Continue. Thank you. Out. Okay. So, and then as it relates to the, you know, my friend, the mayor of Costa Mesa, who I will say got more votes than I got in both my election and re-election for mayor of Costa Mesa, so he won the bet. But was there any issue regarding that race? No, not that I'm aware of. As part of every election, we do a hand tally audit where we randomly select at least 1% of the precincts in the county and hand count every single ballot in those precincts to compare them to the voting system results. And that every one of those audits that I've done, including this one, has confirmed that the results from the voting system are accurate and every contest has to be. So we actually do more than 1% because typically, when we randomly select 1%, there's a certain number of, we had 171 contests in this election. So we had to pick another 60 or so. We had 85 total precincts in that audit, and only 23 would have been the random 1%. So we're going through that process. We voluntarily do an additional audit, called a risk limiting audit. It's not required by state law, but we feel that taking that extra step of looking at the ballots a different way, which that random, we tell it which contest we want to audit, and then using a randomly created seed number, rolling dice, the 20 digit number, software, then randomly selects ballots with that contest on it for us to compare the paper copy of the ballot to the cast vote record in the voting system to ensure that the vote was actually counted and that confirmed that everything was accurate. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Page. All right, two more quick questions for you. And the first is you may not say anything, sit down please. You are disrupting this meeting and I will have the sheriff remove you. People we've been through this last Last chance, sit down, sit down. Mr. Cage, last question, or last two questions. What discretion does a governing board have after you've certified an election to reject that certification, or to not accept the certification for their particular jurisdiction, or maybe more importantly to not declare elected particular candidate under their jurisdiction. I'll probably ask Leon. And that may be a Leon question. I'll probably ask Leon for a little help with this, but I don't have the election's code in front of me. But as I mentioned, I have the authorities of County Elections Official to certify, and then I'm required to present those certified results to each governing body of every jurisdiction that had an election on the ballot. And then that you and the other governing bodies will declare the winner in those contests you have jurisdiction under. In terms of investigations there's obviously if the board of supervisors or the district attorney or somebody believe that there was a problem with the election in some way there are provisions in the law for them to seek a court order to open up an investigation. Okay anything to add to that, Council? Two words, litigation ensues. Mm-hmm, yeah. Okay. I would characterize the board's action today as ministerial. The elections code does have a process for election contests. If a candidate contended that theistrar got it wrong, right? Their legal remedy would be to file a lawsuit against the Redistrar against the county seeking an injunction against the board to prevent the board from declaring the result of that election. None of that has happened here. Last question, and I wish you luck with it. There are people here of good faith who genuinely do not trust the system. Who think some election or others, or maybe all of them, was unfair? What is your answer to those people? Quiet, please let him answer the question. One more time. So when I have somebody who has doubts or doesn't trust, my first place to go is always to invite them to come and observe. We'll answer their questions. What is up, Kate? Did I get it? I'm just going to come to the serve and come to the serve and come to the serve. Last chance, if there I can die there. I can die there. I can die there. I can die there. I can die there. I can die there. I can die there. I can die there. I can die there. I can die there. I can die there. I can die there. I can die there. I can die there. I can die there. I can die there. robust pro-active approach at educating the public about what we do. You know, we put out an electronic newsletter twice a week that we have many people who are signed up to receive by email. We have social media accounts that are very active. We go out to public events, speak to community groups. And, you know, I see it as my obligation to make sure that the public understands everything they can about how elections are conducted in California and to answer their questions. But ultimately, some of the things that members of this community want to see in terms of changes are going to have to be changes that are made in Sacramento. Things like eliminating, mailing a ballot to all voters, that's required in every county in the state right now under state law. So if that, if people want to see those kind of things change, if they want to see us go back to single day precinct voting in polling places, that's the change that will have to happen in Sacramento. Okay. Thank you very much. Anything further? No. No. All right. Thank you very much. Let me bring it back to the board. The item is in front of us for emotional entertain emotion. Move approval. All right. Move and seconded further discussion. Seeing none any oppositions or abstentions. All right. Matter carries unanimously. Thank you very much. That concludes today's agenda. Our next board meeting is scheduled for 9.30 a.m. on December 17, 2024. Today's meeting is adjourned.