However, the sheets show that the subscribing witness did not list the struck-out signatories when adding up the number of signatures on the sheet. These were not counted in the first place and thus should not be excluded. Since the signatory's mark in that block was meaningless, no error is caused by the strikeout's remaining uninitialed. In the absence of evidence that the assessment roll submitted is inaccurate, the court must accept this contention. Twenty-three names were printed instead of signed in cursive.
Petitioner states that three pages show in incorrect count of signatures.
The court finds that only one of these is incorrect, page 100, where two people signed as a couple and were incorrectly counted. The four signatures on that sheet are invalid. Sheet 131 and 136 are bad because they lack a date in the subscribing witness's statement and an address therein, respectively. Together these amount to nine invalid signatures. The total number of excludable signatures is 83.