Latest news with #DavidCouch
Yahoo
16-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Kern County extends Dominion Voting System contract for 2 years
BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (KGET) — The Kern County Board of Supervisors approved a contract extension for the controversial Dominion Voting System. Election Integrity advocates have had complaints and mistrust of Dominion systems since the 2020 election. But the contract expired, and with a bill going through legislature right now to separate the Registrar of Voters from the Auditor-Controller's office a decision had to be made. Applause and thank you's filled the supervisors chambers Tuesday, approving a two year contract extension for the Dominion voting Systems. A stark contrast from when the contract was renewed three years ago, when the board chambers erupted into chaos. The elections office, election integrity advocates, and Supervisors David Couch and Leticia Perez are all on a committee to talk about voter related issues, this decision came out of that committee. In January, the board decided to split the Auditor-Controller with the Registrar of Voters, due to community concerns that it was too much work for just one person. 'As the auditor our job is to help those departments in safeguarding taxpayer money and I do take that part of my job very seriously,' said Aimee Espinoza, Kern's Auditor-Controller-Clerk and Registrar of Voters. The bill has to go through the state assembly, which hasn't acted yet. Then a new Registrar of Voters can be appointed by the board. The over $580,000 dollar contract extension lasts until December 31st 2027, which would cover the elections next year. Reasoning for extending the contract is to let the new Registrar of Voters decide whether to keep the Dominion system or change to a different one. 'The new ROV coming in maybe a year or year and a half that they have all the opportunities to correct the ship if you will,' said Charles Shinn of the Concerned Citizens Group. There are currently three voting systems approved by the Secretary of State, Dominion, Heart, and ESNS. 'The majority of counties use dominion and the majority of the top 15 largest counties use dominion,' said Espinoza. At the end of the contract, the appointed ROV would start a contract process and start to look at the different approved systems. While election integrity advocates are happy about the news, they still say that there issues currently lie at the secretary of state, because the voting system options are limited. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
16-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
With a new head of elections position pending, supervisors postpone voting machines decision
County officials are putting off a decision about which voting machines are used in the future until the new registrar of voters position is filled. In January, the Board of Supervisors voted to create a new registrar of voters position separate from the auditor-controller-clerk to manage county elections. Legislation allowing that change is currently pending in Sacramento, said Amy Espinoza, the current auditor-controller-clerk, but since the county is looking to create an entirely new elections department, the decision about whether to keep or find a new vendor for the county's voting system should be made with the new department head. "I am pleased to bring before your full board this morning what I considered to be a joint recommendation of myself, Superior (Leticia) Perez; Supervisor (David) Couch and our concerned citizens, which is to extend our current contracts so that the newly anticipated registrar of voters can play an active role in selecting Kern County's voting system," Espinoza said. For months, several members of a group of concerned citizens have spoken at every supervisors meeting to voice their concerns over state and county elections. Last August, an ad-hoc committee chaired by Perez and Couch was formed to discuss the group's concerns. The committee's findings were presented to the full board in January. Among the recommendations was the creation of a position dedicated entirely to managing the county's elections. During public comments, members of the committee and the board thanked each other for working together to resolve contentious issues. "When we first started, as you remember, it was not all lovey-dovey like it is today, not even close, if you recall. And for very good reason, there was a lot of fear, there was fear for me," Perez, the lone Democrat on the board, said from the dais. "There will always be issues, and there will always be tensions, but we have demonstrated here today how to do it right and how to make sure that the public feels listened to and a part of the process." The citizens — who during earlier public comment reiterated their statements about county voter rolls — said their concerns were not meant as personal attacks against the county or the board. "Thank you, (Espinoza), for working with our committee, and we appreciate everything that you've been doing," said Charles Shinn, one of the committee members. "This process has never been a personal thing. It's been a difference of our perspective and maybe the perspective that has, in our perspective, that's come down from the Secretary of State," Shinn said. Espinoza said a position solely dedicated to elections would benefit the county. "Kern County has grown, our registered voters has grown, the complexity of what the state is requiring us to do in elections is massive. Every year there's new changes to law, and it is a lot to cover multiple areas," Espinoza said. "Luckily, I have staff who assist and keep me abreast of things, but I do believe that Kern County will be best served with someone who can completely focus on elections." Supervisors voted unanimously to extend the county's contract with Dominion Voting Systems to Dec. 31, 2027 at a cost of $583,812. Because the auditor-controller-clerk is an elected position, a new registrar can't take over election duties until the end of the Espinoza's current term in 2028. Under the county's proposal, the auditor-controller-clerk would continue to be an elected position while the registrar of voters would be appointed by the board. Once the new registrar is selected, then the county can decide what to do about the voting machines contract: continue with Dominion or search for an alternate vendor. Catalytic converters Supervisors Tuesday approved an ordinance that would make possession of a catalytic converter — that is, one that's not attached to a vehicle — unlawful without proper documentation. Catalytic converters contain valuable metals and are often stolen to be sold for $800 to $1,200, according to David Stephens, chief deputy of the Investigations Bureau at the Kern County Sheriff's Office. Under current state law, Stephens said, law enforcement can't take action unless someone has at least nine catalytic converters in their possession. "If an officer makes contact with an individual possessing eight or less catalytic converters but cannot identify a specific victim, who then must be able to positively identify the catalytic converter as theirs, then the officer may have to release the individual along with the catalytic converters," Stephens told the board. According to the ordinance, valid documentation includes, but is not limited to: • A signed bill of sale from the original owner authorizing removal of the catalytic converter, including the vehicle owner's name, address and telephone number. • Verifiable documentation from an auto-body shop proving the owner relinquished the catalytic converter to the auto-body shop or similar business. • Verifiable electronic communication from the previous owner to the possessor relinquishing ownership of the catalytic converter. • Vehicle registration associated with the catalytic converter together with photographs showing an etched associated license plate number or vehicle identification number or driver's license number of registered vehicle owner claimed to have conveyed the catalytic converter to the person now in possession. Violations would be charged as a misdemeanor with a $1,000 fine and up to a year in county jail. Fines increase with subsequent violations.
Yahoo
30-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Court filings reveal opposition to intervening motion in Arkansas direct democracy lawsuit
Efforts to collect signatures for two proposed ballot measures for the 2026 election will begin this fall, following the attorney general's approval of ballot language Thursday. (Mary Hennigan/Arkansas Advocate) The League of Women Voters of Arkansas and the state attorney general argued in federal court filings this week that two ballot question committees are not entitled to intervene in the League's lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of direct democracy laws. Protect AR Rights and For AR Kids filed a motion to intervene in the case on May 14, arguing that their interests aren't 'adequately represented' because the League's suit didn't challenge all the laws they intended to. The committees also argued that intervening is more efficient than filing a separate lawsuit, which they said would likely be consolidated with the League's complaint under federal court rules. Arkansas grassroots organizations seek to intervene in lawsuit challenging direct democracy laws In its response to the motion, which was filed by Little Rock attorney David Couch on Wednesday, the League of Women Voters of Arkansas and ballot question committee Save AR Democracy (SARD) argue the two ballot question committees don't have standing and have no right to intervene because they are not questioning LWVAR's ability to challenge the laws in the original complaint. LWVAR filed a federal lawsuit against the Arkansas secretary of state in April alleging that eight recently approved state laws governing direct democracy violate the First and 14th amendments to the U.S. Constitution. Direct democracy is the process by which Arkansans can propose new laws or constitutional amendments and place them on the ballot for a statewide vote. Arkansas is one of 24 states that allow citizen-led initiatives, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. The motion to intervene from Protect AR Rights and For AR Kids seeks to challenge two laws not included in the League of Women Voters' suit — Act 602 of 2025, which prohibits ballot titles from being written above an eighth-grade reading level, and Act 236 of 2023, which mandates petition signatures must be collected from at least 50 counties instead of 15 as directed in the Arkansas Constitution, according to court filings. Protect AR Rights and For AR Kids also seek to add an additional defendant, Attorney General Tim Griffin, who is not a party to the pending litigation but is counsel for the secretary of state, which would further complicate the matter, according to LWVAR's response. In the defendant's response, also filed Wednesday, Griffin noted that when he certified For AR Kids' popular name and ballot title for a proposed education-related constitutional amendment on Feb. 26, the ballot title didn't need to meet the reading-level requirement because Act 602 was not yet in effect. The League and Save AR Democracy made the same point in their filing to argue that For AR Kids lacks standing to challenge the reading-level law. Protect AR Rights submitted its own proposed direct-democracy ballot title on May 19 that's still under review by the attorney general. LWVAR argues this group also does not have standing because its proposed ballot title has not been rejected because of Act 602. LWVAR argues that challenging Act 602 is further complicated because Griffin substituted and certified Save AR Democracy's ballot title on May 21 so that it would meet the eighth-grade reading level test. 'Even if Protect AR Rights had standing, the inclusion of that issue in the litigation would unnecessarily complicate this matter,' the response states. 'Nothing would prohibit Protect AR Rights from instituting litigation if it is denied a ballot title to meet the eighth grade reading level test.' Griffin argues that the motion to intervene should be denied because Protect AR Rights is the only party that can challenge Act 602. This is also the only claim that can be made against the attorney general, he said. State law requires the attorney general to certify or reject proposed ballot titles within 10 business days. The deadline for a response to Protect AR Rights' proposal is June 3. Because it is still under review, allowing the ballot question committee to intervene 'would require finding an injury in fact where such harm is hypothetical and not concrete,' Griffin wrote. 'Because Plaintiff SARD was able to satisfy the Act 602 requirement, the court has to resort to speculation to determine that Protect AR Rights' ballot title could never be at an eighth-grade reading level,' he said. 'For the same reasons, Protect AR Rights cannot bring a cause of action against Attorney General Griffin.' Regarding the proposed intervenors' challenge to the 2023 law requiring signatures from 50 counties, LWVAR's response notes that this law is already being challenged by the League in Pulaski County Circuit Court. The case has been fully argued, briefed and is awaiting the court's ruling. Plaintiffs argue there is no need for the claim to be pursued at this time and if it were allowed, it should be held in abeyance under the Pullman Doctrine, which provides that federal courts defer to state courts if the state ruling would resolve the federal issue. 'The issue before the Circuit Court is simply, can the Arkansas General Assembly amend the Arkansas State Constitution by statute? The League believes that it cannot, and a ruling in its favor would resolve the federal issue,' according to court documents. Griffin also cited the Pullman Doctrine and noted that the losing party in the case is expected to appeal to the Arkansas Supreme Court. 'Thus, the [federal] Court should abstain from exercising jurisdiction over this claim, which is only being made by Movants to intervene,' he wrote. 'Standing alone, this claim cannot be a basis for Movants to be entitled to intervention.' LWVAR further argues that Protect AR Rights' proposed ballot measure 'would conflict with and be in direct competition with' Save AR Democracy's approved measure because both seek to amend Article 5, Section 1 of the state Constitution, which governs the state's initiative and referendum process. 'It would be improper for the Protect AR Rights to intervene in litigation filed by SARD to get a measure approved that directly competes with the measure already approved and being circulated by SARD, in that it would create unnecessary conflict,' according to LWVAR's response. Save AR Democracy also argues Protect AR Rights' proposed ballot measure contradicts with a claim made in the complaint — that the 'exhaustive list of disqualifying offenses' that prohibits individuals from collecting signatures is unconstitutional. 'The measure submitted by Protect AR Rights to the Attorney General for approval would enshrine this very prohibition in the Arkansas constitution,' the response says. 'This represents a core political and policy difference between SARD and Protect AR Rights and would inject unnecessary controversy and conflict into the litigation.' Protect AR Rights' proposal also sets forth a procedure regarding a legal challenge to the ballot title that 'differs substantially' from Save AR Democracy's procedure. Save AR Democracy's measure would require an approved ballot title to be submitted to the secretary of state who publishes notice of approval and the procedure for challenging the approval. The measure would establish a 45-day window during which a challenge could be filed with the Arkansas Supreme Court. The Protect AR Rights measure would require a challenge to be filed within 10 business days of the attorney general sending the sponsor a letter approving the ballot title, but it provides for no notice. Providing the public 'adequate notice and opportunity' is essential to due process, the response states. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
21-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
USPS workers protest against proposed changes with potential job cuts
The Brief USPS in 2025 cut jobs, close facilities, and possibly privatize. Workers protested in Detroit, joining 200 unions across the country. The union claims that the dismantling of the post office began during the first Trump administration. DETROIT (FOX 2) - The U.S. Postal Service employs 640,000 people across the country and has been serving citizens since 1971. What they're saying Now, in 2025, the USPS has announced plans to cut jobs, close facilities, and possibly privatize. American postal workers braved bad weather on Thursday for a day of action, with more than 200 union locals across the country protesting the proposed privatization. "The post office belongs to the public—it's written in our Constitution. It's funded by the people whocome and buy stamps and mail stuff off," said Chris Ulmer, president of APWU Detroit. "When you privatize an entity like this, you look at losing jobs, you look at poor service, you look at price increases," said David Couch with the American Postal Workers Union. "This is the people's post office." David Couch, representing the truck drivers, emphasized the importance of public services. "We've been a great public service, especially for poor areas. They need medications and stuff delivered to their houses and essential items delivered, and we're trying to keep it that way," he said. Big picture view The union claims that the dismantling of the post office began during the first Trump administration, and they fear it will only worsen. Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib stood with the postal workers, advocating for their jobs and opposing the privatization proposed by Trump and Elon Musk. "So much of our quality of life depends on the postal service working, well-funded, being efficient. and the way you do it is to not cut them up and cut their services and privatize them," said Tlaib. Meanwhile, Kathy Carter, who has been with the postal service for 42 years, believes privatization is a terrible idea. "It's just going to make their pockets fatter and more people suffering. So how good is that for our country when you have more people who are needy?" Carter said. The Source FOX 2 talked to protesters in Detroit and used information from previous stories.
Yahoo
18-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Kern Supervisor David Couch considering run for state Senate
BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (KGET) — Kern County's District 4 Supervisor David Couch is considering a run for state Senate, he confirmed with 17 News Monday afternoon. Couch told 17 News he is eyeing Senate District 12, currently represented by Bakersfield Republican Shannon Grove. Grove will be termed out in 2026 and is expected to run for a seat on the State Board of Equalization. BPD asking public for help in locating missing adult Couch said he will make a decision in the coming weeks. Couch was just re-elected to his supervisorial seat, and that term ends in 2028. If he wins the state Senate seat in the 2026 Midterm Election; he'd have to resign from his District 4 seat midterm. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
