DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BOARD OF ELECTIONS AND ETHICS
WASHINGTON, D.C.
August 5, 1998

MEMORANDUM

TO: Board of Elections and Ethics

FROM: Alice P. Miller
Executive Director

SUBJECT: Petition Verification Results for Initiative Measure #59: "Legalization of Marijuana for Medical Treatment Initiative of 1998"; Recommendation to Reject the Petition as Numerically Insufficient.

After completing the Board's standard procedure for verifying registered voter signatures contained in Initiative Measure #59, Legalization of Marijuana for Medical Treatment Initiative of 1998, the Board's staff, in conjunction with the Office of Planning, Data Management Division, has determined that this initiative does not meet the statutory requirements for certification to the ballot, in accordance with D.C. Code Sec. 1-282(a).

It is therefore my recommendation that the Board reject the Initiative Measure No. 59 petition as insufficient, in accordance with D.C. Code 51-1320(o)(1), because it does not contain a sufficient number of valid signatures of duly qualified electors of the District of Columbia.

An overview of the petition verification process and a summary of its results are entailed in this report. Additional detail on the verification procedures, the mathematical formulas used in calculating statistical confidence levels, and related documentation are contained in several attachments to this report.

Overview of the Petition Verification Process

The petition verification process is conducted to determine whether an initiative petition contains the required number of registered voter signatures needed to qualify for placement on the ballot. The required minimum number is 5% of the registered voters citywide and 5% of those registered in at least 5 of the 8 election wards, based on the published registration totals in effect 30 days before the petition was filed. The signature requirement for Initiative Measure No. 59 was based on registration totals published as of May 31, 1998. The numerical requirement for Initiative Measure No. 59 is shown in Table A below:

441 4th St, NW, Suite 250 * Washington, D.C. 20001 2745
Telephone: (202) 727-2525 * FAX: (202) 347-2648

Page 2
Initiative Measure No. 59
August 3, 1998

Table A

 WARD

Voter Registration as of May 31, 1998

Signature Requirements (5%)
 1  41,264  2,063
 2  41,344  2,067
 3 45,732 2,287
 4 47,106 2,355
 5 45,786 2,289
 6 43,945 2,197
 7 43,110  2,156 
 8 31,664  1,583 
 Citywide 339,951  16,997

The petition verification process that the Board follows -- detailed in the Standard Procedures for Verification of Initiative Petition, attached-has four basic steps:

. First, the Board's staff uses the voter registration computer system to verify that the circulator of each petition page was registered to vote in the District from the address listed on the Board's records, during the time of circulation, as required by law. Pages not circulated by duly registered voters are rejected at the outset.

. Second, the name of each petition signer is checked against the voter registration computer file to determine if the petitioner was a duly registered voter in the District at the time the petition was signed, as required by law. Only those petition signers whose names and addresses are found to match the Board's registered voter file are entered into the petition-checking program as "verified registrants".

. Third, the totals of verified registrants are compiled, citywide and by ward, to determine whether the petition contains enough apparent registered voter signatures to proceed to the signature verification stage. The total number of verified registrants is provided to the of fice of Planning. Data Management Division. Subsequently, the Of fice of Planning numerically provides the Board with the names to be used in the random sample process.

Page 3
Initiative Measure No. 59
August 5, 1998

* Fourth, random samples of 100 signatures from each ward are drawn, for comparison to the original voter signatures on file in the Board's records. To be accepted as valid, each sampled signature must reasonably match the Board's records, and the signer must be registered at the address on the petition as of the date signed. The validity rate of the random samples is then used to determine the sufficiency of the petition as a whole, at confidence level of 95%.

Summary of Findings

The Initiative Measure No. 59 petition, containing 1,816 pages, was filed on July 6, 1998. After completing the procedure of verifying the voter registration status of petition circulators and signers - steps 1, 2, and 3 in the process outlined above - the total number of registered voters listed in the petition was found to be 17,092. This total exceeded, by 95, the required 5% minimum of 16,997 registrants citywide. In Addition, the minimum was attained in Wards 1, 2, 3, 6, and 8 - as shown in Table B on the following page. While Wards 4, 5, and 7 - as also indicated in Table B - fell below the required minimum, sufficient names of registered voters had been identified in the petition, at both citywide and ward levels, to proceed to the signature random sampling.

The random sample procedure is conducted to determine, with the required confidence level of 95%, whether or not a sufficient number of valid signatures of registered voters (as distinct from registrant names and addresses) are contained in the petition. To facilitate the sampling procedure, the Board's staff produced computer listings of the registrants identified in each ward, from which the Office of Planning Data Management Division randomly selected eight ward samples of 100 petition signatures each. To do this, the registrants contained in each ward listing were serially numbered by the Board, so that a set of 100 random numbers, generated by the Data Management Division for each ward, would identify the ward's 100 selected registrants. The listings also contained the petition page number on which the registrant's signature to be validated would be found. The staff then pulled each selected registrant's voter registration application and compared the randomly selected petition signature with the registrant's original signature on file. The total number of validated signatures in each ward sample of 100 was then reported to the Data Management Division.

The effect of the random sampling process was thus to establish a validity rate for the registered voter signatures in each ward. The Data Management Division applied this validity rate mathematically to the number of ward registrants identified in the petition and the ward's numerical signature requirement, to determine with 95% confidence whether or not the ward should be accepted as having a sufficient number of valid signatures. Sufficiency for the District as a whole was then assessed using a stratified random sampling formula, which incorporated the results of the various ward samples and applied them to the citywide criteria.

Page 4
Initiative Measure No. 59
August 5, 1998

These mathematical calculations were made by the Data Management Division -- as reported in the attached memorandum of Herbert Bixhorn, Chief, Office of Planning, Data Management Division and Mathematical Statistician -- and are summarized in the table below. As shown in Table B. Wards 1, 2, 3, 6 and Ward 8 were accepted as having a sufficient number of valid signatures based on the random sample. Wards 4, 5 and 7 were rejected as insufficient. However, at the citywide level, the District as a whole was rejected with 95% confidence as containing an insufficient number of valid signatures.

Table B
Ward

Signature Requirements (5%)

 No, of Registrants in Initiative Petition

No. of Signatures Validate in each Random Sample

Decision with 95% Confidence
1 2,063  2,501  97 of 100  Accept
2 2,067  2,254  99 of 100  Accept
3 2,287 2,604 100 of 100 Accept
4 2,355  1,572  99 of 100  Reject
5 2,289 1,971 98 of 100 Reject
6 2,197 3,091 98 of 100 Accept 
7 2,156 1,199 100 of 100 Reject
8 1,583 1,900 98 of 100  Accept 
Cityward 16,997 17,092    Reject 

While the petition thus met some of the ward level requirements, it clearly failed the random sample test at the citywide contained on the level -- primarily because the total number of registered voters petition was barely above the minimum requirement (16,997 vs.17,092). This meant that the random samples needed to be perfectly validated in order for sufficiency to be closer to being achieved. As the statistician noted, "because the number of verified registrants for the District was only slightly above the required number, the proportion of valid signatures needed for acceptance would have been over 99 percent." Although the random samples showed validity rates ranging above 95%, sufficiency of the petition still could not be achieved at the citywide level.

Based on the foregoing, the results of the petition verification process for Initiative Measure No. 59, "Legalization of Marijuana for Medical Treatment Initiative of 1998" are the determinations that the measure does not meet the statutory requirements for certification to the ballot and that it should be rejected by the Board because it does not contain a sufficient number of signatures of registered voters of the District.

Page 5
Initiative Measure No. 59
August 5, 1998

Attachments:

Summary Report for period ending May 31, 1998

Standard Procedures for Verification of Initiative Petitions

Memorandum to Herbert Bixhorn, Chief, Data Management Division
Offfice Planning; Requesting Random Sample Designation Re. Petition #59,

Memorandum to Herbert Bixhorn, Chief, Data Management Division,
Office of Planning, Results of Random Sample Verification Re. Petition #59

Memorandum from Herbert J. Bixhorn, Chief, Data Management Division Statistical Summary and Findings on Initiative Measure #59 Petition

cc: Kenneth J. McGhie,
General Counsel

D.C. BOARD OF ELECTIONS AND ETHICS
Data Systems Branch
MONTHLY REPORT OF VOTER REGISTRATION STATISTICS

CITYWIDE SUMMARY

Party Totals by Ward for the period ending May 31, 1998

WARD

REP

DEM

STD

UMP 

N-P

OTH 

TOTALS

1
2,424  30,751  567  117  7,335  70  41,264

2
5,101 28,007 384 90 7,683  79  41,344

3
8,179  29,392  172  19  7,911  59  45,732

4
1,837  39,240  512  198  5,289  30  47,106

5
1,629  38,613  593  188  4,740  23  45,786

6
2,959  34,734  573  293  5,343  43  43,945

7
1,325  36,790  557  151  4,271  16  43,110

8
1,128   26,275 611 120  3,523  31,664
TOTALS 24,582 263,802 3,969 1,176 46,095 327  339,951


Ward Index

INSERT

 


District of Columbus
Electron thirds
Affective January 199








DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BOARD OF ELECTIONS AND ETHICS
WASHINGTON, D.C.

STANDARD PROCEDURES
for
VERIFICATION
of
INITIATIVE/REFERENDUM
and RECALL PETITIONS

441 4th St., N.W. Suite 250 * Washington, D.C 20001 2745 * Telephone: (202) 7272525 * FAX (202) 3472648


Standard Procedures for Verification of Initiative Petitions

Section 1- Receipt the Petition

When an Initiative Measure (or Measures) is (are) filed, the Registration Division staff will initially perforrn the following steps in the formal RECEIPT phase:

Step 1:

(a) Count the number of pages submitted by the proponent; and
(b) Issue a receipt for number of pages actually submitted.

Step 2:

Using an Automatic Numbering machine, serially number ALL petition pages.

Step 3:

After eliminating those lines which are completely blank, the Registrar of Voters determines if petition contains the required number of signatures to permit continuation of the acceptance and verification process. (See note below for handling of multiple initiative measures)

Step 4:

Registration Division staff will make photocopies of each petition page, front and back, before moving to the verification phase.

NOTE: In the event multiple Initiative Measures are filed and processed at the same time, the Registrar of Voters will ensure that great care is taken to keep the petition pages for these measures separated and will color-code, by highlighter, the Measure Number on the face of each petition page.

Standard Procedures for Verification of Initiative Petitions

Section 2- Verification Preparation

After the Registrar of Voters has determined that the petition, at face value, contains the required number of signatures to permit continuation of the acceptance and verification process, and the Registration Division staff has made the required copies of all petition pages, preparation of the petition for registration verification will proceed.

Each petition page will be reviewed, and using a highlighter (different colors when dealing with multiple Initiative Measures), the Registration Division staff will strike through any petition line that falls into any of the following categories:

(a) The line has been
obliterated by the proponent

(b) The line is blank

(c) The line has neither a
printed name nor a signature

(d) The line has no address

(e) The line has no date of
signature

When any of the above conditions exist, strike through the line with the highlighter

NO REGISTRATION VERlFlCATlON WILL BE PERFORMED ON THESE LINES

(f) ID Circulator's Affidavit: Yellow out any instance where the Circulator's signature. address. or dates of circulation is missing. Set any pages ID this category aside

After the staff has completed the Verification Preparation phase and identified all those petition lines which are to be excluded from the Registration Verification process, all petition pages will be passed to a central control point, normally the Registration Processing Manager, for handling through the next phase.

Page 2



Standard Procedures for Verification of Initiative Petitions

Section 3- Registration Verification

The Registration Processing Manager will ensure the equitable assignment of petition pages for verification; maintaining an accurate record of the petition pages assigned to each staff member.

Upon initial receipt of assigned petition pages, each staff member will first be performing registration verification on the circulator of the petition as follows:

Step 1: (a) See if the circulator of the
petition is a registered voter
at the address listed.

(b) If "YES", write the voter
registration number and date of
registration (in RED INK) next
to the circulator's name on the petition.

(c) If "NO", write "NR" next to
the signature of the petition circulator.

(d) If the circulator has a transfer date on the computer that is later than the first date of the circulation period stated in the Circulator's Affidavit, put these pages aside, in their own pile. Give this pile to the Registration Processing Manager.
(e) Repeat Step 1 for each assigned page until it has been determined how many pages are eligible for further review. In other words, how many pages were circulated by a properly registered circulator. Set aside those pages with "NR" because they are automatically excluded from any further review.

Step 2:

(a) On each of the pages retained for further processing, look at each "DATE SIGNED" on the petition page and compare it with the "DATE OF REGISTRATION" of the circulator.

(b) If the DATE SIGNED" by the voter is prior to the "DATE OF REGISTRATION" of the circulator, put an "XC" on that line. This makes the line invalid

Page 3


Standard Procedures for Verification of Initiative Petitions

Section 3 - Registration Verification - Circulator (Cont.) Step 3 - For Registration Processing Manager Only:

In cases where there is a transfer date on the after the initial circulation date, Registration Processing Manager will determine whether the circulator was properly registered at the address listed an the dates circulated and signed.

(a) If "YES", Registration Processing Manager writes the voter registration number and date of registration (in RED INK) next to the circulator's name on the petition. The Manager then reviews the signed lines of the petition, comparing the dates of the signatures against the Transfer Date for the circulator and placing an 'XC" on those lines which are invalid.

(b) If "NO" Registration Processing Manager writes "NA" next to the signature of the petition circulator and puts these pages in the same pile as the "NR" pages.

After each group of assigned pages has bees completely through the above preliminary process, they should be returned to the central control point, normally the Registration Processing Manager, for later distribution to the staff who will complete the verification process on the signers of the petition.

Section 4- Registration Verification - Signers

NOTE: As this next phase of the verification process continues, remember that with the advent of NVRA, the status of a voter record could be any one of the following: ACTIVE-INACTIVE -- DELETED.

After Registration Verification of the petition circulators has been completed, and all petition pages have been resumed to the Registration Processing Manager, those pages with the "NR" and "NA" indicating an ineligible circulator will be removed and the remainder distributed to the staff for the next phase-registration verification of the signers of the petition.

The Registration Processing Manager will again ensure the equitable distribution of petition pages to the staff involved, and will again maintain a record of the petition pages assigned to each staff member. To begin, the processing staff should display the "Main Menu" on the Voter Registration System Terminal. From that queen:

Choose "13" to begin entry into the petition checking module;

- Choose "2" to enter the "Signatures to be Defined" segment.

In response to the system request, complete the entries for the following lines:

ELECTION CODE:

CONTEST NUMBER: .**

CANDIDATE NUMBER: 1

SECTION NUMBER: ****

DATE FILED: **/**/**

NON-REG. VOTERS: 0

Page 4



Standard Procedures for Verification of Initiative Petitions Section 4- Registration Verification - Signers (Con't)

The Data Systems Manager will already have provided each member of the processing staff with the pre-determined entries for the "ELECTION CODE" (*) and "CONTEST NUMBER" (***).

Because this petition checking procedure is for Initiative Measures, "CANDIDATE NUMBER" will always be "1".

The "SECTION NUMBER" (****) will be the 4-digit page number assigned by the Board when the petition was received (See Section 1, Step 2)

"DATE FILED" (**/**/**) will be the date the Initiative Measure was filed, and "NON-REG. VOTERS" will always be ZERO.

When the above entries are complete, press "A" to accept and proceed to the next step, press "C" to cancel, or press "M" to modify (correct or change a field).

After the initial entry of data in the above fields, only the "SECTION NUMBER" (Page number) needs to be entered.

Having completed the initial entry into the petition checking module and recorded the various codes, proceed as follows:

1. Select "1" to obtain an Alphabetic look-up screen;

2. Select "3" to obtain a screen which will include the "Last Transfer Date" along with other key elements of each voter's record;

3. Press "RETURN" to start the Alpha Search process.

Once into the Alpha Search and verifying the signers of the petition, great care should be taken in matching signers with registered voters being displayed on the terminal screen.

Although the address listed on the petition MUST match the address on the Board's records at the time of signing, registrants will sometimes sign their names slightly different, such as -no middle initial. Reasonable judgement should be used to determine whether a petitioner is a registered voter. When in doubt, call the supervisor.

Of equal importance is the need to remember to CHANGE THE "SECTION NUMBER" (PAGE NUMBER) IN THE PETITION CHECKING MODULE EACH TIME YOU FINISH ONE PETITION SHEET AND GO ON TO THE NEXT.

Page 5




Standard Procedures for Verification of Initiative Petitions

Section 4- Registration Verification - Signers (son 't)

The alpha search proceeds as follows:

1. Type in the name as it appears on the petition and hit "Return".

2. If a match of the voter's name and address on the petition is found-and there is no transfer date or there is a transfer date which is prior to the date the petition was signed-enter the screen line number to call the voter's record onto the screen.

3. Confirm the name and address and make sure that the voter's registration status is ACTIVE - not inactive or deleted.

4. Enter "A" to accept the entry. Put a check mark next to the accepted name on the petition page before you go to the next name on the sheet.

5. If no match is confirmed for name and address, even after alternative
spellings have been checked, OR, status is inactive or deleted, put an "X" by that line number. Enter "C" to cancel and continue.

6. For cases where the voter's name is illegible, place an "I" by that line.
Try to read both the printed name and the signature.

Special requirements for voter records which have a "transfer Date" which is later than the date the petition was signed. This includes active, inactive, or deleted records.

In those instances where a match is achieved for both name and address,or name only but not address, and the "Last Transfer Date" is after the date the petition was signed, place an "M" by that line number.

Upon completion of each page, the staff member will initial the bottom night hand corner of the petition page.

Page6




Standard Procedures for Verification of Initiative Petitions
Section 4- Registration Verification - Signers (Con 't)

To start a new page, select "P". The computer will then return you to the "Enter Signers of Petition for Validating. screen where everything will appear automatically EXCEPT- the Section Number, which is where you must enter the new Page Number. IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT THE NEW PA GE NUMBER BE ENTERED BEFORE YOU TRY TO VERIFY ANY NAMES ON THE NEW PA GE.

Repeat the verification process as detailed above until all assigned pages have been verified, then return the pages to the Registration Processing Manager.

Re-Check Procedures

Upon completion of all petition pages, all "X" and "I" entries will be rechecked-but not by the same staff member who made them during the initial pass through.

Use the same verification steps as before, but this time use GREEN ink to mark the petition page. Where a match is found in one of the entries originally rejected, place an "OK" next to the previous mark and accept the voter's record.

| Section 5- Production of Tabulation Printouts

Following the re-check procedure, the Data Systems Branch will tabulate the data on verified registrants accepted into the petition checking module and produce the following reports:

a. Alphabetical listings of all registered petition signers, by Ward, whose names and

addresses have been verified. The reports produced will also provide an exact count of each Ward's verified registrants, indicating the page number of the petition where each can be found, and the current registration status of each verified registrant.

b. A listing of all duplicate names found on the petition which will include the petition page number where the duplicates may be found.

In the case of multiple petitions being processed concurrently, separate reporting and listing preparation will be maintained for each petition.

The reported totals of verified registrants citywide and by Ward will be compared to the minimum signature requirements established for the measure. If the registered voter totals reflect numerical sufficiency of the petition, the procedure will move to the next step- random sample signature verification.

Page 7




Standard Procedures for Verification of Initiative Petitions Section 5- Production of Tabulation (ContJ

If the registered voter totals appear potentially insufficient-either at the citywide or ward levels - an assessment of the number of "M" entries on the petition will be made. If there are enough potential "M" entries to affect the sufficiency of the petition, these will be researched to determine if the voter was registered at the address on the petition on the date the petition was signed. Procedures for this are as follows:

Checking the "M" Entries ("M''= Last Transfer Date is after the date signed)

The relatively few entries on the petition that were marked with an ''M'' during the verification procedure are cases where a potential match may exist but further research is required to make a determination. The "M's" are registration records where a "transfer date" indicating a change in the voter's record-has occurred after the date on which the petition was signed.

For example, a voter may have filed a change of address, been reinstated to the active file, or have been cancelled from the roll after the petition was signed. A search of prior record data will be made for these entries if the outcome can affect the sufficiency of the petition.

The purpose of the search is to determine the registration status and address that was in effect for the voter on the date the petition was signed. This process will be completed using a third color of ink, something other than RED or GREEN.

1. Check the "M" entry on the system to see if either the current or any previous address matches the address on the petition.

a. If "no", place an "X" next to the "M" entry on the page;

b. If "yes", check the date of registration and the date of active status to determine if the registrant was unregistered, inactive, or deleted as of the date signed. If any of these are the case, place an "X";

c. If the registrant was in active status on the date signed, determine if the matching address was in effect on the date signed; if it was not, place an "X";

d. If the registrant was in active status at the matching address on the date signed, place an "OK" next to the "M" entry on the page.

2. If the number of accepted "M" entries is significant to the further review of the petition, these will be incorporated into the universe of verified registrants to be examined in the random sample procedure. Addition of accepted "M" entries to the listing of verified registrants may be accomplished either by production of a new listing or attachment of the additional entries to the existing list.

If the voter totals are still insufficient after completing the above, the process ends.

Page 8



Standard Procedures for Verification of Initiative Petitions
.
Section 6- Random Sample Preparation I

Reports produced by the Board will comprise the petition population which will be submitted to the DC Office of Planning, Data Management Division for development of random sampling criteria for signature verification. Eight (8) separate population totals will be submitted, one for each Election Ward, derived from the listings of the names of registered voters in each Ward who were identified in the petition. In the case of multiple petitions, there will be separate groups of listings for each.

The DC Office of Planning, Data Management Division will draw random samples of 100 registrants from the petition population in each Ward. These will be used for signature verification.

Independent samples will be generated by computer using a Statistical Analysis System (SAS) uniform random number generator. The computer output for a given Ward will list 100 random numbers having a possible range of 1 to the total number' of verified registrants for that Ward. Data Management Division will provide the Registrar of Voters with these random numbers, corresponding to the serial numbers assigned on the alphabetical listing of verified registrants for each Ward. The registrants thus designated in each Ward constitute the random sample for signature verification.

Upon receipt of the 100 random numbers for each Ward, the Registration Division staff will highlight each selected registrant on the ward listing and:

a. Retrieve the Voter Registration Affidavits of all registrants whose names appear on the petition and who were selected in the Random Sample.

b. Note the Ward and petition page number on which each signature appears, on each affidavit.

c. Arrange the affidavits in petition page order and attach them to the corresponding petition pages in preparation for signature verification.

Section 7- Signature Verification by Random Sample |

Upon receipt of the random sample sets of petition pages and registration affidavits, the Registrar of Voters or appropriate designee will proceed as follows:

1. Compare the signature on each registration affidavit (or signed roster index if affidavit cannot be located) with the corresponding signature on its attached petition page.

Page 9




Standard Procedures for Verification of Initiative Petitions

Section 7 - Signature Verification by Random Sample (Cont.)

a. Where there is a reasonable match in signatures, place a check mark next to the registrant's name on the random sample report, after also verifying that:

i. The signer was a registered voter on the date the petition was signed.

ii. The signer was registered at the address on the petition when signed.

iii. The signer was not inactive or deleted when the petition was signed.

NOTE: The random sample verification procedure thus includes-in addition to the signature validation-a re-verification of the registration status check that was made initially for each petition signer. This is done in order to provide a statistically valid check against the possibility of any initial error in accepting a petition signer as a verified registrant.

b. Where signatures do not match,

i. Check to see if the registrant has been identified as a "Duplicate" signer and if so, pull all applicable petition sheets for further signature
matching.

ii. If a match is found on any of the petition pages pulled, follow the
procedure in 1a. above.

iii. If no reasonable match is found, place an 'X" next to the registrant's
name on the random sample report. No signature will be finally rejected without the concurrence of the Registrar of Voters.

The Registrar of Voters will report the results of the random sample signature verification process to the DC Office of Planning, Data Management Division.

Section 8 - Determination of Petition Acceptance or Rejection I

Based on the Registrar of Voters' report, the Data Management Division of the DC Of ice of Planning will determine, with 95% confidence, the acceptance or rejection for signature sufficiency of each Ward and for the District as a whole. Data Management Division may specify additional sampling requirements if the 95% confidence factor is not achieved, but when this phase is concluded, the findings will be reported to the Executive Director of the Board of Elections and Ethics.

The Executive Director will then review the findings of the Data Management Division and make an appropriate recommendation to the Board for acceptance of the Initiative as a Measure qualified for inclusion on the ballot at the next citywide election, or that the Measure be rejected for signature insufficiency.

Page 10




DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BOARD OF ELECTIONS AND ETHICS
WASHINGTON, D.C.

July 21,1998

Memorandum

TO:Herbert Bixhorn, Chief,
Office of Planning, Data Management Division

FROM:Alice P. Miller Executive Director

SUBJECT: Provision of Random Sample Universe; Request for Random Sample Designations Be: Initiative Measure #59: "Legalization of Marijuana for Medical Treatment Initiative of 1998"

Pursuant to 3 DCMR 1008.2, the table below supplies the number of apparent registered voter signatures, both District-wide and in each Ward, that have been established as the random sample universe for the Initiative # 59 petition. These totals are shown in the column entitled "Total Signatures to be Utilized for Random Sampling". The table also provides the signature requirement for determining acceptance or rejection of this measure.

The names of the verified registrants in each Ward have been listed alphabetically and are serially numbered. In accordance with 3 DCMR l 008.3, please designate random samples of l 00 signatures from each ward listing for validation against the Board's records.

 

Ward

Signatures of Registered Voters
Required

Total Signatures to be Utilized for Random
Sampling

1

2,063

2,501

2

2,067

2,254

3

2,287

2,604

4

2,355

1,572

5

2,289

1,971

6

2,197

3,091

7

2,156

1,199

8

1,583

1,900

Citywide

l6,997

17,092


441 4th St., NW, suite 250 * Washington, D.C. 20001-2745 * Telephone (202) 727-2525 * Fax: (202) 347-2648




DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BOARD OF ELECTIONS AND ETHICS
WASHINGTON, D.C.

July 31,1998

Memorandum

TO:
Herbert Bixhorn, Chief,
Office of Planning, Data Management Division

FROM: Alice P. Alice P. Miller, Executive Director

SUBJECT: Results of Random Sample Verification Conducted on Petition Signatures Re: Initiative Measure #59: "Legalization of Marijuana for Medical Treatment Initiative of 1998"

Pursuant to 3 DCMR 1008.4, we have completed signature verification of the randomly selected names appearing on the petition filed in support of Initiative Measure # 59. The results of these findings are shown in the table below, in the column headed "Number of Valid Signatures".

In accordance with 3 DCMR 1008.5, please provide your analysis as to whether the initiative petition has met the requirements necessary for the measure to be placed on the ballot. If you have any questions or if additional samples are needed to make a determination please call me at 7272525.

WARD

Signatures of
Registered Voters
Required

No. of Registrants
in the Random
Sampling Universe

Number of
Signatures in
Random Sampling

Number of Valid
Signatures

1

2,063

2,501

100

97

2

2,067

2,254

100

99

3

2,287

2,604

100

100

4

2,355

1,572

100

99

5

2,289

1,971

100

98

6

2,197

3,091

100

98

7

2,156

1,199

100

100

8

1,583

1,900

100

98
Citywide

16,997

17,092


441 4th St., NW, Suite 250 Washington, D C 20001-2745 * Telephone: (202) 727-2525 * FAX: (202) 347-2648

Government of the District of Columbia

Office the Director

July 31, 1998

MEMORANDUM

TO: Kathryn Fairley
Registrar of Voters

FROM: Herbert J. Bixhorn, Chief
Data Management Division

SUBJECT: Statistical Summary and Findings on Initiative Measure #59 Petition

Office of Planning
415 12th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20024

Following is a statistical summary resulting from the random sample verification of signatures on the Initiative Measure #59 petition. (Refer to attached technical document "Criteria for Acceptance or Rejection of Petitions with 95% Confidence".) Our finding is that the initiative petitionisrejected with 95% confidence, as it did not have a sufficient number of valid signatures of registered voters for the District as a whole.

Table l shows the required number of valid signatures and the number of registrant signatures by ward and the District as a whole that were subject to random sampling. As shown in Table 2, five wards were accepted with 95% confidence. Wards 4, 5 and 7 were rejected at the outset because the number of verified registrants in each was less than the required number. Nevertheless, these three wards were sampled so that they could contribute with the other wards to the District-wide figures.

Table 3, which presents the District-wide results, shows that the District as a whole was rejected with 95% confidence.

TABLE 1

 WARD

SIGNATURES OF
REGISTERED VOTERS
REQUIRED

NUMBER OF REGISTRANT
SIGNATURES SUBJECT TO
RANDOM SAMPLING

1

2,063

2,501

2

2,067

2,254

3

2,287

2,604

4

2,355

1,572

5

2,289

1,971

6

2,197

3,091

7

2,156

1,199

8

1,583

1,900

DISTRICT WIDE

16,997

17,092

TABLE, 2

WARD

ACCEPTANCE/REJECTION
PARAMETERS
a1------------------- b1

NUMBER OF VALID
SIGNATURES IN
SAMPLES OF 100
 DECISION WITH 95% CONFIDENCE

1

75------------------- 89

97

Accept

2

86------------------- 97

99

Accept

3

81------------------- 94

100

Accept

4

*---------------------*

99

Reject

5

*---------------------*

98

Reject

6

62-------------------- 80

98

Accept

7

*---------------------*

100

Reject

8

76------------------- 90

98

Accept



TABLE 3

District as a Whole Z(R) = -2.08 Z(R-1) = -2.07

Decision with 95% Confidence: Reject





. _