Early Voting Totals

The Board of Elections has added early voting turnout numbers to its website.  Click on our website  http://www.co.orange.nc.us/elect/ and then click on Early Voting Totals in the box with 2011election information to access the daily report. 

 We were at 531 as of end of day Friday.

 Jim White, BOE Chair

 

Total votes: 227

Comments

How does this compare to previous municpal (odd) years?

There were about 20 votes in the first few days last muni year, but also there was only one site (Morehead).  University Square alone had 146 as of today (todays total was just added).  Interestingly, the highest turnout so far is at the BOE in Hillsborough, so I do wonder whether the sales tax is part of the reason for the increased turnout.

Early voting counts by registered precinct.  The 1st three are Durham County but the voters had Chapel Hill addresses.  

 

precinct_desc Total
27 8
38 3
53-2 25
BATTLE PARK 29
BOOKER CREEK 29
CALDWELL 31
CAMERON PARK 67
CARR 6
CARRBORO 52
CEDAR FALLS 25
CEDAR GROVE 23
CHEEKS 44
COKER HILLS 32
COLES STORE 63
COLONIAL HEIGHTS 67
COUNTRY CLUB 11
DAMASCUS 39
DOGWOOD ACRES 29
EAST FRANKLIN 21
EASTSIDE 25
EFLAND 27
ENO 49
ESTES HILLS 49
GLENWOOD 46
GRADY BROWN 60
GREENWOOD 28
HILLSBOROUGH 30
HOGAN FARMS 78
KINGS MILL 49
LINCOLN 25
LIONS CLUB 51
MASON FARM 12
NORTH CARRBORO 105
NORTHSIDE 42
ORANGE GROVE 58
OWASA 39
PATTERSON 183
RIDGEFIELD 26
ST JOHN 79
ST MARYS 73
TOLARS 19
TOWN HALL 58
WEAVER DAIRY 104
WEAVER DAIRY SAT 11
WEST HILLSBOROUGH 48
WESTWOOD 32
WHITE CROSS 25

James, thanks for compiling this. Of the Durham County precincts, the only one with a sizable number of CH resident voters is 27. Precinct 53-2 has a few (including, fortunately, Greg and Michelle Kleinschmidt Hoover). 38 includes no CH resident voters. (The overall area in 3 counties with Chapel Hill addresses is at least 5 times the size of the Town, based on an accurate zip code map supplied to me by TTA.)  BTW, those who are running early voting sites have access to more detail than just counts.Ed Harrison

The address is all they have readily available in the voting record file.  I could have matched up to registration info that includes municipality, but that's a bit more work to maintain each day and since those voters aren't mine (wish you were!), I haven't done it.

"PATTERSON 183"That number looks a lot bigger than any other precinct.  Is that normal for Patterson?

... but also keep in mind that Patterson is the second largest precinct in the county and the largest that is in Chapel Hill (though not all of it is in the town limits). They have about 74% more registered voters than the countywide average.  They do still seem to be leading by percentage of registered voters who have cast votes, though...
BOOKER CREEK 1.40%
CALDWELL 1.23%
CAMERON PARK 2.48%
CARR 0.58%
CARRBORO 3.10%
CEDAR FALLS 1.04%
CEDAR GROVE 1.59%
CHEEKS 1.00%
COKER HILLS 2.45%
COLES STORE 3.97%
COLONIALHEIGHTS 2.34%
COUNTRY CLUB 0.39%
DAMASCUS 1.43%
DOGWOOD ACRES 1.00%
EAST FRANKLIN 0.92%
EASTSIDE 1.45%
EFLAND 1.47%
ENO 1.88%
ESTES HILLS 2.11%
GLENWOOD 1.99%
GRADY BROWN 1.75%
GREENWOOD 1.14%
HILLSBOROUGH 2.99%
HOGAN FARMS 2.68%
KINGS MILL 2.36%
LINCOLN 1.04%
LIONS CLUB 1.79%
MASON FARM 0.33%
NORTH CARRBORO 4.38%
NORTHSIDE 1.69%
ORANGE GROVE 1.77%
OWASA 1.46%
PATTERSON 4.53%
RIDGEFIELD 1.21%
ST JOHN 2.94%
ST MARYS 2.90%
TOLARS 1.36%
TOWN HALL 2.87%
WEAVER DAIRY 3.49%
WEAVER DAIRY SAT 2.47%
WEST HILLSBOROUGH 1.90%
WESTWOOD 2.05%
WHITE CROSS 1.41%

A lot of the voters in the Patterson Precinct live near the new site for Community House.  I would think that that hot-bed issue is the cause of the high number of voters.  Del Snow

Somebody else can figure out which of these are park neighbors, but here is the breakdown for Patterson.

 

 

AUTUMN LN    3
BARTON LN    1
BERINGER PL    3
BRISBANE DR    1
BROCKWELL RD    1
BUTTERFIELD CT    5
CAITLIN CT    1
CAMILLE CT    4
CASCADE DR    5
CEDRONELLA DR    2
CELASTRUS DR    2
CHATEAU PL    3
CHRISTINE CT    3
CRABAPPLE LN    2
CREEK RIDGE LN    2
CREEK WOOD DR    1
EUBANKS RD    2
FOREST CREEK RD    2
FOREST RIDGE DR    2
FOXRIDGE CT    1
FOXRIDGE RD    2
FRIENDS SCHOOL RD    2
GARRETT DR    2
GLENMORE RD    4
HARRISON CT    6
HATHAWAY LN    2
HOMESTEAD RD    3
JULIETTE CT    1
KOBOLD LN    1
LAURENS WAY    4
LONEBROOK DR    10
LONGWOOD DR    1
MACRAE CT    2
MANORA LN    1
MARTIN LUTHER KING JR BLVD 1
MIMOSA DR    1
NAPA VALLEY WAY    1
NEW PARKSIDE DR    18
OAK HILL RD    4
OLD LARKSPUR WAY    10
OLD STONY WAY    1
PALAFOX DR    18
ROWE RD    5
SONOMA WAY    2
ST LOUIS PL    2
STONERIDGE DR    3
STONERIDGE PL    3
SUNRISE RD    1
TAPROOT LN    3
TEN SPRINGS LN    1
TIMBERLY DR    2
TREMONT CIR    3
TROYS MOUNTAIN LN    1
TURKEY FARM RD    2
VINTAGE DR    5
VITEX ST    1
WEYMOUTH PL    1
WHITFIELD RD    6
WINDY HILL RD    1
WORSHAM DR    6

 

political geeks find this information interesting, however, pinpointing the streets where early voters live and publishing that information on the internet before election day strikes me as instrusive.....very big brother-like. I do not believe that is the intention here, still......

The state is who is tracking and publishing this info on the internet.  I only processed a little for analysis. <URL removed - contact me if you want to see the state source>

The link you sent was a zip file that seemed to have voters names, race, ages, and addresses for what looked like the state. It was a little hard to read on my computer as it was a jumble of text. Is this available to the public? I went to the State Board of Election website and didn't see a link. I believe you mean well, but to be perfectly honest, somehow publishing this data BEFORE election day doesn't seem right regardless of what the state does.  And to be fair, the state didn't isolate the data by precinct and street address based upon a particular hot button issue in the local election. Maybe this is what political campaigns do and I need to get a clue. I am certainly willing for someone to explain why my impression is mistaken. BTW, I enthusiastically voted for James for school board. This isn't about him. 

not to reveal anyone's info but to respond to a guess about why PATTERSON was so high. I don't dig through it like that on a regular basis but I am a data geek and interesting questions will prompt me to go look for an answer. I sent the link to the file because it is there for the public on the BOE site somewhere buried -- somebody pointed me to it directly a while ago.  I use it as a campaign tool solely so that I don't spend resources on people who have already voted. I know one candidate is printing his own materials this year to allow him flexibility in focusing messages - so I suppose this would be even more useful to him.  Can't say my campaign is quite that sophisticated.

I hope I am not seeing this incorrectly but if someone can see a persons name adress etc. and how they voted, it would be an invasion of privacy to use this data and whomever is publishing should stop. Geez why not just throw the social security number and credit card numbers out there also while ther at it.

The State Board of Elections tracks registered voters and if they vote.

That information is available online. 

 

http://www.sboe.state.nc.us/VoterLookup.aspx?Feature=voterinfo 

 

A listing of registered voters is a matter of public record. 

allows voters to look up their own registration information if they know their first and last names and birthdays. While a listing of registered voters is indeed a matter of public record, I wonder if a listing of registered voters (their names, races, ages, precincts, and addresses) who either vote in each election or who voted early is public information. Shouldn't whether you exercise your right to vote be private information? And shouldn't your birthday? And if this information is public information, should it be? Either way, to publish street names with the number of people living on each street who voted early, and to do it on the internet BEFORE eletion day seems rather like bullying. I do not believe that is the intent here, but I think it is a consequence. The folks in that neighborhood already feel like the deck is stacked against them with the town's permitting process. Let them at least vote in private. After the election, sure, dissect the data, publish that which is in the public domain, and analyze to your heart's content.

Allan you need to look up someone is their first and las tame. It gives you address, party, voting location, race brith date. This is way to much information made available WITHOUT a persons permission. I would question anyone's ethics that used this information beyond their own personal information whether it is public or not.

It's pretty common for campaigns to get a file of voter data from the board of elections for campaign purposes. They'll usually sort the database by party affiliation, past voting history, and sometimes demographics. That's how they know where to send those pretty mailers and whose doors to knock on. It's definitely public information, and it's not very nefarious. (Especially compared the data that Facebook and Google collect about us and share with corporations, etc.)

I should be able to opt out of this and choose not to get this waste of paper and also protect my privacy. Would you want to have your children's information out there like this??

Children can't vote until they're 18, so they shouldn't be included.

Was speaking in general. Would you want this type of information listed for children from any source?? The answer is no and the answer to publishing adults personal information from ANY source should be a choice for individuals.

This thread is not about listing information about children, nor is anyone proposing that to my knowledge

Just because it is public information does not mean it is right. People should have the option to opt out of having their information published whether on paper or on the web.

Who said anyone could see how someone has voted?  Whether you vote is by law a public record.  Nobody has (or is publishing) how anyone voted.

Huh

 Above post seemed to indicate election data with names addresses etc. Not sure what else is on file but would not not download if I new where it was. This is how you can get hacked. My point is that personal information should be private and people should be able to opt out of publishing their personal information. Not addressing you but I would questions anyone's ethics if they did utilize files that contained personal information. 

The information on absentee voting is out there for fraud protection. There is a process for challenging ineligible voters who cast absentee ballots (as there is for challenging on election day). As far as birthdays are concerned, what is out there is your YEAR of birth. The election law provdes that your FULL date of birth is confidential due to the potential of identity theft. I do know that parties and candidates have used the early voting list for GOTV purposes on election day to mark off those who have already voted.

Furthermore, parties and candidates get voting information during voting day so that in the afternoon they can target likely supporters who have yet to vote.I understand the concerns if people know how you vote. I don't understand the concerns if people know if you vote.

Is not a question of voting. Is a question of putting all this personal information on the web WITHOUT a persons permission.

The government makes public a lot of "private" information. Anyone can look up someone else's property tax info, including the assessed value of their property, what cars they drive, etc. One database even gave the floor plan of houses. I was amused that you can look up my name and see my real property record, which includes my address. But the same search yields the records on my cars and notes "address withheld due to federal law." Hmmm. Whether or not you voted seems a lot more public than what cars you drive, the layout of your house, or their values.

 You might be amused until someone steals your identity.To me not allowing us to opt out of printing this personal information only provides an easy opportunity to have your identity stolen. This information should be protected but is not just as much as our voter registration information should be protected. All someone needs is your social security number and they got everything they need to reek havoc with your financial situation.

But I see a street on your list called "NEW PARKSIDE DR" tied for the highest turnout at 18 people, and I'm guess with a name like that it's in the region. =p

I hope that no one is surprised that there appears to be a large turnout in the Patterson precinct, which includes the area (or at least parts) around the new Community House.  If there was a hot issue involving our neighborhoods I'm sure all of us would do our best to get the vote out for those Town Council candidates who are most closely aligned with our interests.  I will, however, be very disappointed if those voters also vote for Kevin Wolfe after that tasteless letter and flyer he sent out.

As usual, George says it simply and elegantly. Thanks.

Closest streets to Homestead park are, New Parkside, Worsham, Palafox, Lonebrook, Laurens Way, and Vintage Drive (though I am not sure if Vintage Drive is still in Patterson)

see Section 17-19 for info on DOB confidentiality http://ncleg.net/enactedlegislation/sessionlaws/html/2003-2004/sl2004-127.htmlSECTION 17.(a) Article
7A of Chapter 163 of the General Statutes is amended by adding a new section to
read:"§ 163‑82.10B. Confidentiality of date of
birth.Boards of elections shall keep
confidential the date of birth of every voter‑registration applicant and
registered voter, except in the following situations:(1) When a voter has
filed notice of candidacy for elective office under G.S. 163‑106, 163‑122,
163‑123, or 163‑294.2, or 163‑323, has been nominated as a candidate under
G.S. 163‑98 or G.S. 163‑114, or has otherwise formally become a candidate for
elective office. The exception of this subdivision does not extend to an
individual who meets the definition of 'candidate' only by beginning a tentative
candidacy by receiving funds or making payments or giving consent to someone
else to receive funds or transfer something of value for the purpose of
exploring a candidacy. (2) When a voter is
serving in an elective office.(3) When a voter has
been challenged pursuant to Article 8 of this Chapter.(4) When a
voter‑registration applicant or registered voter expressly authorizes in writing
the disclosure of that individual's date of birth.The disclosure of an individual's
age does not constitute disclosure of date of birth in violation of this
section. The county board of elections
shall give precinct officials access to a voter's date of birth where necessary
for election administration, consistent with the duty to keep dates of birth
confidential.Disclosure of a date of birth in
violation of this section shall not give rise to a civil cause of action. This
limitation of liability does not apply to the disclosure of a date of birth in
violation of this subsection as a result of gross negligence, wanton conduct, or
intentional wrongdoing that would otherwise be actionable."and subsection (d) on confidentiality of the whole record when there is a protective orderhttp://ncleg.net/gascripts/statutes/statutelookup.pl?statute=163-82.10(d) Exception for Address of Certain
Registered Voters. – Notwithstanding subsections (b) and (c) of this section, if
a registered voter submits to the county board of elections a copy of a
protective order without attachments, if any, issued to that person under G.S.
50B‑3 or a lawful order of any court of competent jurisdiction restricting the
access or contact of one or more persons with a registered voter or a current
and valid Address Confidentiality Program authorization card issued pursuant to
the provisions of Chapter 15C of the General Statutes, accompanied by a signed
statement that the voter has good reason to believe that the physical safety of
the voter or a member of the voter's family residing with the voter would be
jeopardized if the voter's address were open to public inspection, that voter's
address is a public record but shall be kept confidential as long as the
protective order remains in effect or the voter remains a certified program
participant in the Address Confidentiality Program. That voter's name, precinct,
and the other data contained in that voter's registration record shall remain a
public record. That voter's signed statement submitted under this subsection is
a public record but shall be kept confidential as long as the protective order
remains in effect or the voter remains a certified program participant in the
Address Confidentiality Program. It is the responsibility of the voter to
provide the county board with a copy of the valid protective order in effect or
a current and valid Address Confidentiality Program authorization card issued
pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 15C of the General Statutes. The voter's
actual address shall be used for any election‑related purpose by any board of
elections. That voter's address shall be available for inspection by a law
enforcement agency or by a person identified in a court order, if inspection of
the address by that person is directed by that court order. It shall not be a
violation of this section if the address of a voter who is participating in the
Address Confidentiality Program is discovered by a member of the public in
public records disclosed by a county board of elections prior to December 1,
2001. Addresses required to be kept confidential by this section shall not be
made available to the jury commission under the provisions of G.S. 9‑2.

for comparison, Durham with 3 locations and has had 3,276 early voters as of Wednesday while Orange has had 2,756.  Durham has almost twice the number of registered voters as Orange

Thursday was the highest one day total for Orange with 378, with University Square  at 105 doubling most of the one day totals from earlier in the week. Grand total now at 3,134 for the county. Durham's total for Thursday was 398, so looks like political interest and organizing is high in Orange County. Durham's GT is now 3,674.http://www.co.orange.nc.us/elect/documents/2011One-stopTotals.pdf

From the rough counts I have, Patterson has now had more early voters (294) this year than total voters in 2007 (293)

http://www.co.orange.nc.us/elect/documents/2011One-stopTotals.pdf
Friday total: 529, of which
BOE 128
Carrboro 107
Univ Sq 118
Seymour 176
daily highs for all four locations
GT now 3663

Durham had 504 Friday
http://co.durham.nc.us/departments/elec/2011_Election/ONE-STOP_TOTALS.pdf
their GT 4178

Final early voting total for Orange County: 4,243 early voters (+ 148 mail ins sent out, they will count if postmarked by 11/8 and received by 11/11) http://www.co.orange.nc.us/elect/documents/2011One-stopTotals.pdf today, the final day, had the biggest turnout of the entire run, 580, led by Carrboro with 185, Seymour with179, Univ Square 121, and BOE office 104Final location totals:Seymour 1,356BOE office 1,095Univ Square 907Carrboro 885  and for comparison with earlier years ( though for none of those earliier elections were polling places open outside the CH-Carr school district and Hillsborough town): 2009: 2344 ( + 43 mail-ins)http://results.enr.clarityelections.com/NC/Orange/11018/19197/reports/de...2007: 1256 ( + 58 mail-ins)http://www.co.orange.nc.us/elect/2007Municipal/stats.asp2005: 1780 (includes mail-ins lumped in)http://www.co.orange.nc.us/elect/nov2005/stats.htm

With stats through FRIDAY's early voting: Early Voters             Total Voter RegistrationD  62.1%                      D 51%R  14.7%                      R 17.8%U  23.1%                      U 30.1%  While this is of course a nonpartisan election, Democratic turnout outperformed.

Are there 07 & 09 figures to compare the early voter % turn out to?  I just wonder in a county that is so heavily democratic if maybe that regularly discourages other parties from participating as heavily.

sorry I do not know.

Early voting percentages all of OC in 2009: Dem 61%Rep 12%Unaffiliated 26%

Thanks for the 2009 past performance context numbers!

This is the total of one-stop voting and absentee requests (because I haven't put the work in to filter by returned absentees) by precinct in my race (CH/C school district):

 

PATTERSON 383
NORTH CARRBORO 239
WEAVER DAIRY 215
HOGAN FARMS 185
ST JOHN 152
ESTES HILLS 141
COLONIAL HEIGHTS 136
TOWN HALL 134
LIONS CLUB 122
CARRBORO 115
GLENWOOD 111
KINGS MILL 111
DOGWOOD ACRES 97
DAMASCUS 96
GREENWOOD 89
BOOKER CREEK 82
RIDGEFIELD 78
EASTSIDE 78
CEDAR FALLS 76
NORTHSIDE 75
OWASA 71
COKER HILLS 69
BATTLE PARK 66
WESTWOOD 65
LINCOLN 56
MASON FARM 46
EAST FRANKLIN 45
COUNTRY CLUB 36
WEAVER DAIRY SAT 19
  3188

btw, this compares to 10974 overall voters in 2009 and 7920 in 2007.

?

I don't have (can't find on the state site) the 2007 file, but for 2009, Patterson shows 135 EV/Absentee (same list as I'm using for 2011 counts).

Pages

 

Community Guidelines

By using this site, you agree to our community guidelines. Inappropriate or disruptive behavior will result in moderation or eviction.

 

Content license

By contributing to OrangePolitics, you agree to license your contributions under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License.

Creative Commons License

 
Zircon - This is a contributing Drupal Theme
Design by WeebPal.