OK, OK both sides appear a bit tacky in this. Yeah, Ann McFall should probably have taken the high road and just gone ahead and talked to Pat Hatfield. However, if she doesn't want to, really that's her choice. But she does undercut her position when she says how wonderful the Daytona Beach News Journal is. C'mon! That creepy eastside paper is a stinking, rotten corpse, doomed by years of unethical predatory business practices by the Tippen Davidson family. It silenced West Volusia's 110-year-old distinguished voice, the DeLand Sun News, by taking it over and closing it. Karma is now paying back the News Journal. Thank goodness the DeLand Beacon came along and thank goodness it's so darn adorable. Sure, it's obvious the Beacon should require that its staff steer clear of donating to political campaigns. Again though, the Beacon is, overall, so adorable, we can overlook this one flaw, especially since its equally adorable publisher has no formal college journalism training and -- though admittedly a fairly smart cookie -- probably just doesn't know better or how foolish this makes her look.

This collection of posts is another fine example of how a handful of sidewinding radicals are distorting the truth by wielding agrily an opaque mullett wrapper in the face of a politically blinded community. This is one of many instances I have seen the Beacon toss the relative facts aside and only publish information that infers controversy or wrongdoing and worse yet, possibly with political motive. I applaud McFall for declining comment to this reporter. The people and the press have no right to waste the time of our tax paid officials. It is foolish to suggest a flood of calls to the SOE office. If you have a problem with them, file a complaint with the unbiased State Attorneys office. If you are lucky Fran Monaco might respond to your requests. He didn't to any of mine nor did his spokesperson. Hopefully change will come in our local government just not in the SOE office. I will be voting for McFall.

This is typical of McFall's behavior of paronia. She leads by terror. She punishes employees for off the clock behavior and for who they hang out with after hours. She tells employees who they can talk to and what they can do on their own time. That's not right. She fired people and intimidated employees for what they did on their own time. Oops, I'm sorry, did I say thier own time, or is it Ann's time.

Her paranoia and vindictiveness shown in refusing to talk to this reporter shows the same behavior she shows in running her office. She thinks she can control everything around here.

Whatever happened to real investigative journalism instead of taking someone's word for something? McFall is a well known liar. She brags about it, yet people believe her. What is wrong with you???

Why do you insist on believing lies from a known liar? she brags about lying. She thinks she is smarter than everyone else. Why choose to help her in that quest?

She says she ran to do a better job than Deannie Lowe. She disrespects the job Deannie did for years and tries to claim she has done better. And yet she couldn't even find a poll worker who could figure out how to provide the audio ballot to Deannie's blidn son so he could vote on the touchscreen. How shameful is that?

I pray and hope that voters see how incompentent McFall is and vote against her.

Douglas,

You like to provide historical news stories? Let's go head to head, here's one McFail would like to forget about:

http://www.votersunite.org/article.asp?id=6747

Hundreds of voters received the wrong ballot. Of course, McFail said it was much less, but we all know she LIES.

You people don't think that McFall has improved elections in Volusia County in her first term in office? Maybe ya'll don't remember what it was like when Deanie Lowe was in office. Here's an old article from the Washington Post to refresh your memory:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A2748-2000Nov11

As for the budget, do you really think that this year's budget should be less than it was four or more years ago in actual dollars, and you would get the same level of service? It hasn't gone up, when adjusted for inflation and compared to other county budget items; in fact, it's gone down this year because of McFall, and service has improved.

Oh, and someone said something about Orange County's cost per voter being lower? That's just plain false. Check it out yourself from the Orange and Volusia budgets posted online.

I hope Susan is looking at some of the postings of information and realizing that McFail plays dirty politics (bringing in the $20+,000) in enforcement fines into play into the race. Things that shouldn't be considered. Please read what people are posting and find areas that show the problems Mc Fail has created.

I heard even though she talks of cutting the budget by $$$ if you compare her first year with Deanie Lowes last year the changes are huge. Ann's spending money big time and for what? I saw something on the news, can't remember when though, that said Volusia had one of the largest cost per voter for a vote. Way bigger than Orange, Seminole or Flagler. What's wrong with that picture?

Now Douglas:

You state:

She has vastly improved the efficiency and accuracy of elections in Volusia, and I know she will continue to do so.

And what facts do you have to prove this? Her word, which everyone in Volusia County Government knows is worth, how much, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Sorry for you to hear it hear Ann, but everyone knows you are a liar,they know you brag about it, and besides, you have been caught in so many lies you just don't realize it.

So, Douglas, shall we compare the budget from Ms. Lowe to Ms. McFail? Sure some things changed, some things upped, some things decreased, where do you want to go?

Other costs? Let's go there.... Errors? We can compare those as well..

And, let's look at those 60 year old interns Ms. Ann has on staff.. what are they interning for? Her job?

So, I love it! McFail (sorry, saw that somewhere and thought it applied) disputes the truth, espouts whatever she wants and it is taken for gospel. Heard that her so-called 'interns' are mostly temps just relabeled as interns. Most aren't in school, in fact, most aren't under 50 years old. What are they interning for? Retirement?

For Douglas: How's this for breaking the law? How can McFall claim to interpret this Statute for explanation of putting the soil and water district race on the primary ballot?

F.S. 582.18 Election of supervisors of each district.--

(1) The election of supervisors for each soil and water conservation district shall be held every 2 years. The elections shall be held at the time of the general election provided for by s. 100.041. The office of the supervisor of a soil and water conservation district is a nonpartisan office, and candidates for such office are prohibited from campaigning or qualifying for election based on party affiliation.

McFall backs up her unethical behavior with lies which noone questions. I love how she calls her internship program a success. What are the 60 year old temps she calls interns interning for? To be 65 year old poll workers?

"Rational Voice", let's not be irrational and make generalizations about McFall's supporters. And, I think, accusing McFall of breaking the law is a little bit irrational, too. Can you cite specific instances? Has McFall ever been accused in court or convicted of anything that you accuse her of? It sounds to me like you're assuming her guilt about something without any sort of evidence or official corroboration to back up your claims. Anyone can make false, irrational accusations and pretend to be the voice of reason.

Furthermore, you're basically claiming that the elections office staff and poll workers are trained to be 'physically threatening' when faced with complaints? Well, that sounds completely rational to me...

Your list of the 'real issues' in the race perfectly illustrate why I'm voting for McFall in the SOE race. She has proven herself competent and more than accommodating in her 4 years as SOE. She has vastly improved the efficiency and accuracy of elections in Volusia, and I know she will continue to do so. I personally don't trust the 'wild card' Pynchon to do the same.

Regarding Mr. Winston Smith's comment,

Had you taken the time to read the terms and conditions clearly outlined (see "By commenting on this article, you agree to follow these terms") before you posted a comment on this website, you would have seen a complete description of how "...The IP addresses of all those posting comments is recorded...". This is not an unusual thing for a website to do, and stores no personally identifiable information about you, unless you consider the state you may (or may not) live in to be such.

When two computers connect to share information over the internet, the IP address is the required piece of information that allows the two systems to send and receive information information from one another. An IP address can be spoofed using clever software, and certain web services (like AOL) provide people with a new IP address every time a new page is accessed. As such, it is not considered to a be a particularly reliable piece of information by itself, but in general can provide a good idea if information might have come from the same (unidentified) computer or network.

I built much of the back-end system that powers the Beacon's site, and the information gathered about users does not extend past the usual recording of ip addresses and similarly innocuous information used to gauge which pages and sections of the site are receiving the most traffic.

This is not 1984, I promise. If you are genuinely concerned about your online anonymity, please do a quick Google search for a TOR client, which will allow you to browse the net completely unidentifiably by using a complex network re-routing system. Do be aware the Google and other search engines will be recording similar information to what the Beacon captured about your visit.

-Adam

I find it interesting that McFall's supporters, and the Beacon haters, are so angry, frustrated and slanderous. Yes, it appears lapse of judgment took place by assigning Ms. Hatfield to this story. The Beacon could have swept the entire story under the rug, and they didn't. They put it all in print so you can decide the matter for yourselves.

I don't think this article is any more or less biased than the non-researched editorial by the News-Journal endorsing Ms. McFall. The NJ ignored facts they reported on over the past few years regarding Ms. McFall's reluctance (and failures) to comply with Florida's Sunshine Law. Yet the NJ endorsed her.

I can understand why Ms. Hatfield is reluctant to turn to other media reports. What if THEIR reporters are biased? Whose campaigns did those reporters donate money to? Reporters must go to the source for their information.

Ms. McFall could have prepared a press release and made it available to all media outlets, regardless the individual reporter assigned to the story. She would have her facts in writing and can use them again when someone else asks for the same information at a later time.

It is very important, as others have pointed out, that Ms. McFall's actions over the past four years been viewed as a whole. She has not been compliant with the Sunshine Laws. She sent voting equipment home with poll workers days before the 2006 election even though it was common knowledge the optical scanners as well as the touch-screens could be tampered with by using a standard filing cabinet key. A thin strip of red "tamper proof" tape was all that stood between a fair election and a whitewash.

I worked that election, and I was horrified by the casual manner in which equipment and ballots were handled. Procedures were ignored by poll workers, and I was physically threatened when I attempted to report a breach of procedure. These actions, even when reported to Elections Office employees, were minimized. Staff responds in the way in which they are trained. Enough said.

I fail to see where the anger is coming from, unless it is due to a lack of facts and a true understanding of what goes on at the Elections Department compared to what SHOULD be going on.

The no match/no vote issue is very important. It may determine the outcome of this election; not just the presidential election, but the SOE and other races. I can think of several ways in which the voter registration database can be unknowingly, carelessly, or deliberately manipulated in order to keep certain individuals or groups of people from voting. That is where the anger should be directed. A slip of a temporary data entry person's finger, and it could be you who will be voting on a provisional ballot. If that happens, you will have precious little time to travel to the Elections Department and prove to them you had the right to vote in your assigned precinct, and have your ballot counted. The no match/no vote (it should be called no match/vote provisionally) puts undue burden on voters because of a clerical error or worse.

I hope this post leads to a better understanding of the real issues in the SOE race: compliance with Sunshine Laws and state-mandated election procedures, transparency of the entire voting/election process, accountability to all citizens, cooperation with anyone who makes a legitimate request for information, and the highest degree of accuracy possible.

IP addresses are like the numbered mailboxes in a post office. Anyone can send mail to or from a numbered box without using any identifiable information. That's all the IP address is - a numbered box. Ms. Shepherd's web analyst, like any good web analyst, took note of the fact that the same box number has been used repeatedly when posting about this article. I do the same for a website I manage. It alerts me to an impending denial-of -service attack or hacking attempt. There are valid technical reasons to understand how often a particular IP address has accessed a website. Ms. Shepherd explained two possible scenarios of how a single IP address can be used to abuse a website or blog. I saw no accusations or implied improprieties in her response.

Cookies are not as life threatening as people make them sound. Your browser and other security software can be set to prevent any cookies from being created on your computer, regardless attempts to personalize you interaction with a website. Most privacy notices, end-user license agreements, and terms & conditions all say the same thing. Yahoo uses a "web bug" or "tracking beacon" to record every web page you visit on their website and any other website you link to from one of their pages. The bug/beacon is turned on by default. You have to find the link in Yahoo's legal documents and follow it to another page to turn off the bug/beacon. I find that more intrusive than a newspaper using cookies to decide which advertising I should see.

It is only fair that visitors to this website know when the site is being abused, if in fact that is what is happening. Remember that this is the Beacon's website and they are free to operate it as they see fit. If you do not agree with the Beacon's terms of use, please don't post comments here. Flaming Ms. Shepherd because she is a good steward of her company's resources is wholly inappropriate.

Thank you Ms. Shepard, spokesman for the Ministry of Truth.

A review of The Deland Beacon's PRIVACY POLICY section of this website....

IP Addresses and Cookies

Cookies do not damage files or allow anyone to access your personally identifiable information ˆ they simply allow us to tailor information and advertisements to make your visits more enjoyable....this information will not include any personally identifiable information.

-------------------------------------------------

Really? I guess freedom of speech is only entitled to those who work at Oceania headquarters(Deland Beacon) as for the rest of the rabble...disperse!

-------------------------------------------------

Regarding Tracking of Personal Information from the Deland Beacon's PRIVACY POLICY section of this website....:

"We use encryption software and other security measures to protect the loss, misuse, and alteration of sensitive information under our control."

--------------------------------------------------

My glory what is this some sort of sick Diebold software?? Can we really trust the sanctity of our web browsing safety with this "vapor"ware in place?

Your Humble Slave,

Winston Smith, Citizen Zero

Note: To save your computer tech some work -> IP Address Houston, TX United States or Oceania, PA...or whatever suits your imagination

Readers should know that, of the 44 comments below, 16 — all criticizing The Beacon or Pat Hatfield — were sent from the same IP address.

What does that mean? It can mean one person, using different screen names, made all 16 comments. It can also mean 16 people, operating from the same location and all using the same Internet connection, made the comments.

We don't require readers leaving comments to give their actual names or e-mail addresses, because we want to encourage unfettered free expression here. But we thought you should know this fact about this forum.

We appreciate all of our readers, whether they agree or disagree, and as always, we are committed to providing a forum, in print and online, for a variety of opinions.

Thank you.

— Barb Shepherd, co-publisher

What is wrong with an elected official referring a citizen to published news stories that answer her question? It's not that McFall wouldn't answer the question, it's that the question had been answered several times elsewhere. There is NO WAY for McFall to know whether Hatfield was contacting her as a journalist or as a campaign operative. It looks like Hatfield had blurred that line before, so why would anyone expect her to have any degree of journalistic integrity now?

Jack, you are right, Pat Hatfield's political giving history IS none of Ann's business...it's the business of EVERYONE WHO READS THE PAPER. We deserve to know if the Beacon has horrific reporters who disregard ethics and potentially misuse their journalistic privileages because they have gotten too close to certain campaigns (Pynchon). The fact that you keep trying to make this about Ann shows that you do not get it. Ann is not the issue here...this hack reporter and sorry excuse for a newspaper is! Nobody with a sane mind in his or her body faults Ann for what she did. Essentially, she blew the whistle and stood up to a bully reporter...that's the type of person I want fighting for me in the Supervisor's office...someone that won't be bullied around by special interests...like you, Jack!

Hmm...Wrightington, Wrightington? Oh yes, the same Wrightington who has maxed out his personal contributions to Ms. Pynchon? The same Jack Wrightington who wastes money earmarked for democratic candidates on his pet independents? That unbiased Jack Wrightington? LOL - please, you're killing me with hillarious irony Capt. America.

So...here's a clue for the slow folks on the right (oops, sorry, that's redundant!) who fail to grasp the basic nature of the problem they're all in a dither about: Ann McFall is a public servant. We don't work for her; she works for us...all of us, and the cuddly nature of her relationship with the Diebold Corporation has given us due cause for concern. So the idea that she would not answer a legitimate question about her interpretation of the no match, no vote law, a statute that might place her, unwittingly or otherwise, firmly in league with those trying to disenfranchise thousands of Florida voters, is absolutely preposterous. When Ann signed on, she gave up the luxury of deciding which voters she will talk to when she gets herself in a snit. Simply put, when a voter asks a question, Ann will answer that question, accurately and truthfully, regardless of the voter's profession, political affiliation or political giving history. Anything less simply serves to convince the public that Ann is not up to the job.

Ann is a partisan; her opponent, Susan Pynchon, an NPA. I'd **** sooner have my vote counted by someone who at least gives the impression of being neutral.

Ann would do well to remember that her position demands that she serve all voters equally, and that requires answering any and all legitimate questions. Frankly, from a job standpoint, Pat Hatfield's political giving history is none of Ann's business. If Ann can't handle the job, resignation might be the best choice.

Go Ann Go!!!!! As a former newsperson, I would never donate to a candidate's campaign. It goes against everthing I was taught about ethics in journalism. Bravo to the "real" newspapers for having ethics and having a policy about donating to political campaigns. Who would have ever thought that the Sentinel and News Journal were more ethical than the Beacon???? Bravo to the Sentinel and News Journal for having a policy that is ethical and professional!!! The Beacon has a big lesson to learn from this whole situation.

The only dereliction of duty is on behalf of the Deland Beacon! Here are my two favorite quotes in this article:

FIRST QUOTE

"Unlike many newspapers (KEY PHRASE), The Beacon has no policy prohibiting employees from contributing to political campaigns or otherwise supporting candidates. If a news-team member is strongly supporting a particular candidate, he or she is prohibited from writing stories about that race."

SECOND QUOTE

"As one of The Beacon's three staff writers, Hatfield has been assigned to cover general elections events, and has been working on a story about frequent clashes between Florida Fair Elections Center and McFall over access to public records and Elections Office procedures. "

The Beacon couldn't pay me to read this paper now!

Sylvia, if you pull your head out of rearend long enough to log onto the computer again, you will seee that there are 2 photos. One of McFall, one of Hatfield. Try clicking the link that says "photo 1 of 2" or "next" under the photo. There you will see the "don't take my picture because I'm guilty of unethical newspaper and journalism practices" of Hatfield.

Sounds to me like the Deland Bacon is being exposed for its own less than partial reporting. Can you imagine the surprise? smile

Perhaps the Bacon can learn a lesson about simply reporting the media from a position of unfettered middle ground and less as a agent of change.

I don't care what your blessed political opinion is there, but don't expect the world to fall in silence when you cross the line from observer to active contributor.

Pat, what are you smoking? It is NOT a deriliction of duty for McFall to choose not speak with someone! It is a deriliction if her office does not comply with public records requests, and there's been no allegation of that by your paper.

She is free to choose who to speak with. And frankly, she's making the right choice in this case. Personally if I were her, I wouldn't grant an interview with anyone at your paper. Give her credit for being willing to speak with someone OTHER than Pat Hatfield.

If you feel she is breaking the law by not speaking with a hack reporter, file criminal charges under Chapter 119 of Florida's open government law and see how far you can get the state attorney to proceed with it. I'd like to be there when he laughs your paper out of his office.

Good grief! Ann McFall's behavior is the epitome of paranoia and pettiness. To refuse to answer a reporter's question because said reporter made a donation to McFall's opponent is a dereliction of her duties as Supervisor of Elections. This brings into question her ability to put her responsibilities to the voters of Volusia County ahead of her personal feelings about certain individuals. Thank goodness we have a community newspaper open and honest enough to bring this matter to their readers' attention. While still Supervisor of Elections McFall is responsible to ALL the voters in this County - not just the ones who support her re-election. Her silly behavior in this matter is symptomatic of her lack of professionalism and a good example of why we need a new Supervisor of Elections.

The person in the photo is Ann McFall, not Pat Hatfield. If the person in the photo "just looks like she's guilty of wrongdoing," as one commentator suggests, then it's McFall.

I consider myself a principled progressive, and when Obama and many of the other democrats refused to go on Fox (Faux) News for a long time during the primaries I fully understood and supported their reasoning. If we apply the same principles here, McFall is definitely in the right. She has not refused to talk to the Beacon, or to private citizens, just this reporter who apparently has acted unethically in the past. I say again: Good for McFall!

Hatfield just looks like she's guilty of wrongdoing in that photo! HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA! I guess McFall exposed the Pynchon campaign support staff...it's the Beacon!

Hatfield is to unbiased as Ahmadinajad is to sane.

I can't believe the Beacon and its reporters. This is such a sad day for Volusia County news...especially here West Volusia. Beacon...you owe us, the citizens, better than that!

DELAND NISSAN...I WILL NOT BUY A CAR OR TRUCK FROM YOU BECAUSE YOU SUPPORT THE BIASED BEACON! CONRAD REALTY...THE SAME GOES FOR YOU!

Constitutional rights? Get real lady! You sound as crazy as Pynchon! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! The Beacon is biased and deserves to be shut down, or to have an all out ban by elected officials from commenting to its hack reporters! Businesses that have ads in the Beacon WILL NOT BE SUPPORTED BY ME!!!!

The reporter on this story needs to be fired! As the article stated a majority of news groups prohibit its journalists from contributing to campaigns and those that do reassign those journalists to other stories. But not the good ole Beacon! I agree with the other writer who said that no comment is an acceptable statement. Heck...wouldn't you do the same if you knew what McFall knew when this crumby reporter was fishing for info? The Beacon really went out on a ledge by doing what they did...and now their foundation is cracking. I wonder how many other examples of this horrific excuse for journalism occured?

It is McFall's job to answer questions about elections for Volusia County no matter who is asking those questions. If information is restricted from any citizen we all suffer for it.

The Beacon's choice to restrict or allow campaign contributions by its reporters should have nothing to do with whether or not the elections officer of the county answers questions from citizens.

To allow behavior like McFall's to continue is to support and condone the restrictions of liberties and constitutional rights--behaviors which are destroying our country and which have to stop.

Since when is no comment an unacceptable answer? All this **** about investigating McFall or launching inquiries is hype and shows how kooky the McFall haters really are. The only investigation that needs to occur is on the Beacon's side! They could potentially have reporters misusing his or her roles in acquiring information and distributing that info to the Pynchon campaign! Jeez! The little respect this paper did have, is out the window. I'LL BE PULLING MY ADS TODAY!!!!

It is the worst kept secret in the county that Pynchon, Garber (see "kitty")and members of the Beacon are in bed together - and are ruthless political bullies. In 2006, Susan Pynchon the head of Florida Fair Elections a supposed non-partisan group called DEC Phil Giorno and tried to bully him into supporting Don Spence who was running for Soil and Water at the time. When these bullies did not get their way, Pynchon went ape and left a number of threatening messages on Giorno's cell phone, stating she was calling on behalf of FFE and the board.

So much for impartial non-partisanship espoused by FFE...these sanctimonious crackpots wouldn't know that concept if they fell over it.

To repeat my previous point, since some commentators don't seem to get it, Hatfield was not writing an article about the McFall vs. Pynchon campaign. She was writing about the "no match, no vote" law, which has nothing to do with their campaigns. As a private citizen, she has a right to support whomever she pleases, and as a reporter, she has a right to get information from public officials.

Step right up, the circus of Volusia County Fringe-Kook Liberal All Stars has arrived. Kitty Garber, Eric West, Judy Thompson. What a collection of nut-job leftist fanatics we have on hand to headline this circus...What, was the Daily (wac)Kos blog not working this weekend?

Folks, you can spin this all you want. All the **** aside though, this was the only thing Ann could do in this situation. Obviously this reporter has an agenda and Ann is right to protect herself. Of course any elected official must comply with public records requests - which her office has done on hundreds of ocassions with this crackpot organization. There is NOTHING, however, that requires her to speak with people she chooses not speak with. Get that straight.

I'll be glad when Pynchon and her band of Tin Foil Hat-wearing buddies can go back to UFO sightings and their "Bush Planned 9/11" conventions. Just keep her away from the elections office. A vote for this woman would be the most clear example of voting for the inmates to run the asylum Volusia county has ever seen.

My wife and I will be proudly voting for Ann in November, not just to keep the nuts out of government, but also because there has been no justifiable reason to remove Ann from the job. She has handled everything thrown her way to this point with grace and professionalism and as even the News Journal said, deserves to remain on the job.

At least the Beacon is telling us they are biased. LOL!

Should we be surprised that Pynchon is stooping to new lows, as outlined by this story? After all, the lady owes the County nearly 30 GRAND in code enforcement fines, admits to breaking the law by using unlicensed contractors to work on her house...meanwhile, she can't show up on time to debates and other important meetings. A tree stump could run against Pynchon and win this election. Short story: Pynchon is Poisonous

Wow...bias in plain sight! Why am I reading this paper still?

Okay...so the paper is biased in reporting...like we didn't know the media was biased to begin with? The real story here is that Pynchon simply is not capable of running the elections office, and is attacking McFall through the media. Another low down dirty Pynchon trick. Doesn't Volusia deserve more than Pynchon's deception?

Did the Beacon just write an article outlining how they are biased? Nice! At least they are willing to admit it. Maybe the N-J should follow suit!

What a hack job article and outfit the Beacon is. As the article stated...most papers have a strict policy against allowing reporters to donate to campaigns. ADDITIONALLY, those reporters that do donate to campaigns are traditionally banned from writing articles on the race they donated to. NEITHER IS TRUE OF THE BEACON!!! I'd be upset too if a reporter donated and supported an opponent and wrote articles on my race. This story just shows how unprofessional this paper really is.

Added note: I say that everyone should call the Supervisors of Elections office and ask about the no match--exact match ruling by Ann McFall...ask what will she enforce come Nov. 4th elections. Question it...

MAKE A PHONE CALL--flood the office...and the Beacon while you are at it!!

There's a dangerous rumor going around the internet in Florida right now, and it's being repeated by some news outlets.

TO BE CLEAR: when you vote in Florida, the address on your identification CAN be different than your registration address.

Thousands of voters around Florida could be discouraged from voting or even denied their rights based on this misunderstanding. And nobody knows better than Floridians how big a difference even a few votes can make.

We need to make sure this false rumor isn't reported as truth and alert people to the facts.

Write a letter to the editor of your local paper now and help preserve voting rights.

MAKE A PHONE CALL!

The voter identification law is relatively new, and there is a lot of honest confusion around what will be required of Florida voters this November.

But this election is too important to let the confusion go uncontested.

Once this rumor gets established in people's minds, it will be very hard to dislodge. That's why we need to act now to push back with the truth.

I think Ann McFall's response is scary. There better be a lot of poll watchers this election with that kind of Supv. of Elections. My understanding is that a voter's addresses do NOT have to match - my understanding is that is the law--interesting that Ann McFall thinks otherwise. how about clarification?

TIME TO CHANGE SUPERVISORS--but for this election...show up and vote--get an absenttee ballot, vote early, but vote.

I call on the Beacon to get a definitive answer - legal answer - and hold Ann McFall to account for following the law.

An email from a friend about this-->

Pat Hatfield, who is a reporter for the Beacon and an old friend of Susan's, asked Ann McFall about how she was implementing the "No-Match" law. Pat was told that she would get no information from Ann because she had given money to Susan's campaign and that she could "read about it in the News-Journal." Of course, the NJ endorsed Ann.

This is an outrageous abuse of power. In her official capacity, Ann is not entitled to grant or deny access based on who supports or opposes her. This is clearly an attempt to intimidate Susan's supporters--especially those who might have to interact with the elections office. They are being told that if they want the services that Ann is supposed to provide, then they cannot support Susan. Ann should not be allowed to retaliate against those who do not support her.

SOUND FAMILIAR? Do something...

I always find it funny when so-called special interest groups such as Florida ("Fair" for them)Elections and the Deland Beacon hide under the "non partisan" label when it suits their needs but feel no qualms about supporting a candidate with their collective financial resources in-house and with free media support when it suits thier decidely "partisian" ends.

I don't see the individual reporters from the News Joural lavishing checks on candidates in races. That is eause they are professional enought to understand the meaning of non-partisian in all forms.

While we are on the subject of "non partsian" reporting, when can the citizens of volusia county expect to see the DeLand Beacon covering a story about the thousands of dollars worth of code enforcement fines due county taxpayers from their handpicked candidate?

I respectfully disagree with Douglas's argument that journalists should not be allowed to support candidates. As journalists, absolutely, journalists should not support candidates, but should strive to be objective in their reporting. However, as citizens, off work, journalists should be entitled, like any citizen, to vote, donate, volunteer with/for whatever cause they wish. If that makes Ann McFall or any politician uncomfortable, that is her problem. Moreover, this smacks of retribution by a public official, which sets a troublesome precedence.

Time for a change.

Hatfield was not reporting on the race, but on the subject of fair elections. To whose campaigns has Ann McFall donated? Would this disqualify her from her job? We all have a right to support candidates of our choosing. In the case of Ms. Hatfield, this was a factual inquirey, not a report on either of the candidates. McFall should be required to answer her questions or face an inquirey into her actions. She is our employee and should be required to tell us how she will insure that many of us will not be disenfranchised from voting.

Even journalists have the right to vote, access public information and question their county employees.

By the way, is there any question who Bill O'Reilly supports? I am sure that it is not Sen. Obama who gave him an interview last month.

I sure hope that the ballots are not handled in such a selective manner.

Is it common practice for a public official to check a reporter's name against the list of contributors before answering a valid news question?

Seems like a touch of paranoia is setting in at the SOE office? As well as a refusal to provide needed information to the media.

I simply don't see that a $50 donation towards a candidate indicates bias. What if a reporter has a partner, spouse, children or close friends that donate, does that indicate that the reporter will write a slanted article? I watch the TV news all the time and have never thought about what organizations, causes or candidates my favorite newspeople donate to. I am way too busy to delve into that and frankly I don't care. I think McFall is just a little too paranoid here and has way too much time on her hands.

-No public officer, employee of an agency, or local government attorney shall corruptly use or attempt to use his or her official position or any property or resource which may be within his or her trust, or perform his or her official duties, to secure a special privilege, benefit, or exemption for himself, herself, or others. This section shall not be construed to conflict with s. 104.31.

Obviously, public officials *must* provide the same access to citizens regardless of their political leanings. The inquiry was strictly for information, and there was no justifiable reason for refusing it. This is the sort of behavior we do not need from government officials.

The Supervisor of Elections in any county holds what might arguably be identified as the single most important elected position. This person is charged with the administration of the voting system, which is the bedrock of our democracy. The duty of competent management and transparency is owed to each and every citizen. The new "no match" rule could prevent the counting of otherwise valid votes and it is encumbent on Ms. McFall to elucidate her understanding of the rule to everyone who asks her the question, regardless of their affiliation, in order to minimize this risk. Ms. McFall works for the citizens of Volusia County no matter who they might support in any given race. I sincerely hope that she sees the error of her ways.

The gentleman who just commented is confused and mistaken. Hatfield was not reporting on McFall's and Pynchon's campaigns. She was seeking information on a public matter concerning the new "no match, no vote" law, which is completely unrelated to their campaigns and to the conflict between McFall and Florida Fair Elections Center over access to public records--which it has a right to receive in a timely manner.

Public officials are not allowed to grant or deny access based on whether an individual supports or opposes their candidacy. This is absolutely unethical and an abuse of power. It is the kind of intimidation that bureaucrats in Third World countries use to keep themselves in power.

McFall needs to separate her public office from her candidacy. This is not the first time she has misused her official position to retaliate against Pynchon supporters.

About a month ago, McFall threatened to cancel a meeting with Election Protection Coalition representatives on voter registration issues if I were there. The reason she gave: because I support her opponent. I volunteered to skip the meeting so that no one else would be inconvenienced, but I said at the time that it was an incredible abuse of power.

Individuals--even reporters and representatives of nonpartisan groups--have the right to give money to candidates. But they have the obligation to keep a strict separation between their private opinions and their public work.

McFall has unwittingly illustrated just why she is unsuited for this office. She is ultimately a career politician who believes in using retaliation and intimidation to further her agenda. That is not the person we need running our elections.

Good for McFall! I'm not one of these people who complain about "left-wing" media bias (because that's mostly a myth), but I also think that journalists who openly support candidates shouldn't be able to report on those campaigns. It's an ethical issue, and this journalist (and the beacon) clearly lack ethical standards if they allow their journalists to behave this way.