San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom and the city Board of Supervisors receive an “Update on Request for Proposal for Implementation of New Voting System in 2007.”

The update is principally about the Smartmatic-Sequoia controversy. It addresses concerns about connections to the Hugo Chavez regime in Venezuela, the regime’s 28% ownership in Smartmatic’s software designer Bizta as collateral for a regime “loan,” and the CFIUS investigation. It also recognizes the possibility of malign foreign influence on American elections.

The memo, from the Director of Elections, explains that Sequoia Voting Systems won the bid to update the city’s electronic voting systems, but “the contract negotiations … have not yet been implemented for the reasons stating below….”

  • Temporary suspension of contract finalization. “the Department of Elections … temporarily suspended efforts to finalize the contract” with Sequoia.
  • Lack of certification. “One concern … was that Sequoia had not yet been certified by the Secretary of State for the June 2006 elections,” but this was resolved.
  • Sequoia’s owner, Smartmatic. “Questions regarding Sequoia’s corporate structure” remain a concern.
  • CFIUS review, Venezuelan election contract, and Bizta. “Recent attention of Sequoia’s parent company, Smartmatic Corp., has resulted in both companies requesting a federal review of their ownership structures by … CFIUS …. Concerns have been raised that since Smartmatic Corp.’s principle [sic] owners are from Venezuela and the company provided voting equipment for Venezuela’s recent presidential election while partnering with a small Venezuelan company named Bizta.”
  • Malign foreign influence from Chavez regime. “The nationality of Smartmatic’s principle [sic] owners and its association with Bizta has created worries that Smartmatic Corp. has potential links to the Venezuelan government that could allow Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez’ administration to influence elections in the United States conducted on Sequoia equipment.”
  • CFIUS review to determine ownership. “In response to such concerns, Smartmatic Corp. and Sequoia requested SFIUS [sic] to review the companies’ ownership and business structure for an official finding that the Venezuelan government does not hold any control over Smartmatic Corp. or Sequoia.”
  • Benefit of the doubt to Sequoia and its [Smartmatic] systems. “At this time nothing suggests that Sequoia or its voting systems have in any way been designed or operated according to any influence from the Venezuelan government.”
  • No sign of Venezuelan regime interference. “At this time nothing suggests that Sequoia or its voting systems have in any way been designed or operated according to any influence from the Venezuelan government.”

Attached to the memo is a copy of the Smartmatic/Sequoia news release of October 29, and a corporate Q&A.

Source:
1. https://sfelections.sfgov.org/elections.pdf

1. Why was Bizta described as merely “a small Venezuelan company,” with nothing said about Bizta being the builder of the Smartmatic software?

2. Why did the Board of Elections accept the story that the Venezuelan government’s 28% stake was as collateral for “a $200,000 loan from the Venezuelan government,” and not investigate the public reports that the Venezuelan government-owned 28% of Bizta’s shares?

3. Why did Smartmatic not indicate that Omar Montilla, a representative of the Venezuelan government was appointed as director of the board of directors of the developer of Smartmatic’s SAES, after the government acquired 28% of the company’s shares?