Newfangled Machines Eyed

By EVE HIGHTOWER, Democrat staff writer

The Yolo County Voting Technology Advisory Committee has recommended the county purchase three new types of voting machines.

If they are bought, the machines will be in polling precincts for the November 2005 election.

While the county is not concerned about re-enacting a Florida chad debate, the 2000 presidential election prompted federal law that requires counties to replace antiquated punch card voting systems by January 2006. The Help America Vote Act provides federal funds to upgrade voting systems after states develop individual implementation plans.

California requires counties to get new machines by the first federal elections of 2006, which would be a primary election.

The committee recommended purchasing counters for precincts and absentee ballot counters on Wednesday.

The committee also liked a machine called AutoMARK, which is for voters with special needs. They are meant for voters with hearing or sight impairments and people who do not speak English. The machine can communicate in 32 languages, according to Electronic Systems & Software Regional Sale Manager Keith McGinnis.

Not a single red cent would come from the county to pay for the machines, according to County Clerk/Recorder Freddie Oakley. The machines would be bought with state money provided by federal and state governments. The county will receive $1.2 million from the state. The federal government will provide $300,000. Funding from the feds is part of $2.3 billion the Federal Election Assistance Commission gave to local governments.

Not only will the county not have to spend money on the new system, the proposed machines will put the county under the voting technology budget. Each machine costs about $5,000. At two machines per precinct, the total would be about $1.2 million for the county's 110 precincts.

The rest of the funds could be spent on purchasing tables, computers, printers and other materials for county precincts, said Oakley.

The machines are electronic, but are not the same as those used in other California counties. Local elections last March in California displayed the ineptitude of some systems and catalyzed still ranging debate about electronic machines.

Those opposed to electronic voting machines point to the fact that they are entirely controlled by software and do not allow voter verifiability.

Counties like Los Angeles, decided to go electronic with the understanding that it would be easier. A 2001 UC Berkeley study found that in the 2000 presidential election, electronic and optical scan voting systems performed best in recording and tabulating votes cast, while punch-card ballots did the worst.

The recommended machines use paper ballots that are more efficient than the current system. These machines would allow voters to mark their choices on one card, rather than use a stack of punch cards, according to Supervisor Betsy Marchand, who chaired the committee.

The recommended machines count ballots as they are completed at precincts. Former County Clerk Tony Bernhard said this ought to make the tallying process much easier.

"We would hope for slightly faster computation," agreed Oakley.

This may not come to fruition, Oakley added. One of the most time-consuming aspects of counting ballots is transporting the information from precinct to a center computing place.

"The primary benefit of this system would be disabled accessibility," she said.

Now that the recommendation has been made, Oakley will enter negotiations with the company for the best price, she said.

"Now we get to the hard part."

Wednesday's vote does not necessarily mean Yolo County will purchase the new machines. Ultimately the choice is Oakley's

It is likely county voters will be using these machines come 2005, she added.