Aspen seeks Colorado Supreme Court decision to block election transparency

Yesterday, 11/11/11 triggered a numerologists millenial festival, but for seekers of fully verifiable and adequately overseen elections with unrestricted citizen involvement, it was a cloudy day in Colorado. The City of Aspen, usually considered to be a bastion of progressive public policy, revealed in a press release that it had filed a petition for a writ of certiorari to the Colorado Supreme Court to attempt to overturn an illuminating Court of Appeals ruling that ballots are public records and accessible through open records laws, and that digital copies of ballots need not be treated the same as original paper ballots under law.  Aspen argues that ballots are to remain "secret".  In practice that means accessible to a few rather than to all.

Secret meetings about public documents?

Two separate public bodies in Aspen held secret sessions to discuss my open records request- whew! The irony overwhelms me.
Last night the Aspen Election Commission met to discuss my records request to inspect Aspen’s 2011 ballots, that were voted in a conventional election (not IRV) under procedures that were extensively discussed and enacted prior to the election, and conducted by an experienced election manager from Pitkin County, who is also a lawyer and who understands well the importance of anonymity. I have reason to believe that these ballots are in fact anonymous for all practical purposes and would like to demonstrate the fact to counteract widespread myths that Aspen ballots might be traceable. I issued an open records request to inspect Aspen’s 2011 ballots, that are slated for immediate destruction according to the antiquated state law concerning municipal elections.

More feedback on Aspen's decision to pursue hidden ballots

Email from one of Aspen's Election Commissioners to the City Council regarding process of decision-making for Aspen's Supreme Court Appeal of Marks v. Koch, the ballot transparency case: (Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 08:29:05)

I am requesting that the CC, at their next meeting, or a special meeting, schedule time to hear public input relative to the appeal of the Mark vrs Koch case.  After the public has had an opportunity to express their thoughts the CC should properly vote to enter into executive session to resolve the matter.  There are energies being spent to challenge the process the CC followed to enter into executive session and decide to appeal the case.  At question is the legality of entering into executive session from a work session as opposed to a special session or a normal meeting.  The outcome may be the same.  The process would not be in question.