Feds Order New Voting Terminals

By John Voket    Newton Bee   22 September 2005

(This report continues The Bee's ongoing series on Newtown's and the state's eventual transition to new electronic voting machine technology.)

First Selectman Herb Rosenthal was on the front lines today as state officials gathered to discuss ways state municipalities could either delay the replacement of, or seek outside revenue to fund the purchase of new electronic voting machines.

The initiative was thrown into overdrive in recent days as Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz learned that Connecticut would likely be forced to replace all 3,300 lever machines currently in service by January 2006 instead of by Election Day in November 2007, a more manageable deadline that was previously discussed by her office.

While Connecticut and the rest of the nation was looking at the prospect of gradually incorporating computerized voting systems that would bring states in compliance with the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA), a recent inquiry by Pennsylvania's secretary of the state resulted in a ruling from the Federal Election Assistance Commission.

The US Election Assistance Commission (EAC) was established by the Help America Vote Act of 2002. The commission serves as a national clearinghouse and resource for information and review of procedures with respect to the administration of federal elections.

The Pennsylvania advisory is applicable to all states, and indicates that lever voting systems have "significant barriers which make compliance with the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) difficult and unlikely."

Mr Rosenthal attended the special meeting in Hartford in his capacity as the 2005 president of the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities (CCM). Newtown is among the organization's 143 member municipalities, which collectively contain over 91 percent of the state's population.

The CCM represents municipalities at the General Assembly, before the state executive branch and regulatory agencies, and in the courts along with providing numerous other resources and services.

Mr Rosenthal was joined at the Capital by Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, state lawmakers overseeing elections issues, as well as the heads of Connecticut's Associations of Town Clerks and Registrars of Voters. He said discussion at the session centered on two main issues: buying time to complete the necessary conversions and ways to relieve Connecticut municipalities from the unanticipated expense of securing the appropriate number of new electronic machines required to have lever-machine-free balloting next November.

"I'm under the impression the attorney general is going to clarify whether or not the EAC ruling is binding," Mr Rosenthal said. "If it is, he may challenge it to at least give towns more time to obtain the new machines."

Mr Rosenthal said he left the meeting unsure whether or not the town would have to actually have the machines on hand by January 1, 2006, or if a purchase order for the machines would suffice to comply with the HAVA mandate.

"We have to have the machines up and running and the personnel trained to oversee their operation in time for the federal election in November 2006, but I'm not sure if we need to have them delivered by January 2006," Mr Rosenthal said.

No matter what, this latest development not only has massive financial implications, especially for the state's disadvantaged larger cities where more machines are required in each voting precinct, but it creates a massive logistical headache for town clerks and registrars offices responsible for recruiting and training volunteers and staff who will be on the front lines to answer questions and ostensibly troubleshoot the new technology as voters pour into polling locations next November.

Newtown Registrar of Voters Lereine Frampton said Newtown currently uses 25 lever voting machines across its voting districts. But she understands that the new machines could take up to three times as long for voters to complete registering their ballots, so Newtown may be in line to acquire as many as 75 new terminals.

But the lack of information coming from the secretary of the state's office is beginning to trouble local voting officials, she said.

"We don't know how many or how much it's going to cost," Ms Frampton said. "I understand that some of the stations will require privacy booths, others will not. And by statute, we're going to have to recruit a tender for every machine."

Registrar Karen Aurelia wondered how the company that is eventually picked to supply Connecticut towns with the terminals can possibly meet the demands for equipment if other larger states are also ordering machines.

"We've seen and tested several machines, and we have our own opinions as to which one would serve Newtown's voters best," she said. Ms Aurelia pointed out that one electronic terminal that is already approved by the secretary of the state for use in Connecticut does not meet HAVA accessibility standards.

Town Clerk Cynthia Simon said that, given the anticipated number of replacement machines required here in Newtown, taxpayers could be facing an unanticipated expenditure of $200,000 to $300,000 in the next budget.

Mr Rosenthal said at Wednesday's meeting in Hartford, attendees discussed the likelihood of the state issuing bonding to help municipalities cover the cost of purchasing the terminals and training.

"The legislators who were on hand seemed sensitive to the fact that we have to comply on such short notice," Mr Rosenthal said. "It's going to be tough, because we're going to have to get this into our budgets by next June."

But he admitted that the burden could still fall on local taxpayers to foot the bill.

"Nobody is making any promises," Mr Rosenthal said. "I advise all municipalities to keep the pressure on our legislators to provide state funds to obtain these machines."