Voting machines may cost up to $600K

Equipment must be accessible to visually impaired; news surprises County Council

By Howard Greninger   Terre Haute Tribune-Star   24 May 2005

A federal law requiring voting machines be accessible to the blind and visually impaired may cost Vigo County taxpayers up to $600,000 next year.

It's a cost that surprised members of the Vigo County Council, which met three consecutive days this week to review costs for the county's 2006 budget. The idea of the meetings is to obtain information early on any unforeseen expenses, such as the new cost for voting machines.

Council President Robert Hellmann said the expense will affect the council's ability to provide county employee salary increases next year.
  

"We have been scraping to find $500,000 to $600,000 to give decent wages and now that is gone. A half million dollars ruins my year," Hellmann said.

Vigo County Clerk Pat Mansard informed the council of the requirement under the Help America Vote Act of 2002.

The act was passed to remove the punch card voting system from national use and allow the handicapped to vote in the 2006 election.

It mandates that visually impaired or blind be able to vote "through the use of at least one direct recording electronic voting system or other voting system equipped for individuals with disabilities at each polling place."

One proposed device uses head phones and allows a visually impaired person, or a person who cannot read, to hear instructions on how to vote, lists candidates and instructs them on pushing correct buttons to vote. The Indiana Election Commission, which must certify the equipment, is still reviewing the technology.

Two types of technology are under review, ranging from $500,000 to $600,000, said Rob McGinnis of Election Systems and Software, the company that provides the county with its optical scan voting system.

The cost to add the visually impaired technology could be about $5,200 per optical scan voting machine, McGinnis said.

Mansard told the council Vigo County must comply with the new devices as the county received $350,000 in federal reimbursements for the county's current voting machines. "If we don't comply, we will have to pay that back" Mansard said.

The county has 95 voting machines, but not every machine must have the new impaired voting ability. That will be determined by the number of polling places in the county during the 2006 elections, Mansard said.

Vigo County presently has 87 voting precincts in 73 polling places, with some polling sites containing two precincts. Nearly all of those polling sites do not meet federal requirements under a federally mandated survey done under the Help America Vote Act.

A state program called Count Us In surveyed all Vigo County polling places in 2004 for accessibility to the handicapped. Only two of 87 precincts met the standards, Mansard said. The two precincts are in one polling place - the Hyte Center, Mansard said.

Mansard said she thinks the law will result in the county having fewer election polling sites.

Vigo County commissioners are responsible for setting polling sites under election law. Commissioners plan to form a committee to review the issue, said Commissioner Bill Bryan.

"We are going to get four to five people, some who have handicaps, together for a committee and ask them to go out and verify these precincts and report on what has changed in the precincts," he said.

Bryan said many polling places have been cited for not having off-street parking, for uneven pavement or simply not having adequate signs. "I don't foresee a major problem," Bryan said, adding the committee should have its work completed within two months.

Hellmann requested Election Systems and Software provide the council with options, such as the county buying the optical scan voting machines it now leases. The county this year budgeted two lease payments totaling $550,600.

They are the final two payments on a lease agreement that gives the county an option to buy the voting machines for an additional $60,000. Mansard opposes this idea, saying a lease agreement "provides full-service with the expertise we would not be able to duplicate. They have a project manager that oversees all of the equipment and has no vested interest in the election other than seeing that the voting equipment functions optimally."