{"id":10571,"date":"2012-03-12T11:43:13","date_gmt":"2012-03-12T15:43:13","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.raleighpublicrecord.org\/?p=10571"},"modified":"2012-03-13T10:48:16","modified_gmt":"2012-03-13T14:48:16","slug":"voter-ed-group-questions-wake-voting-machine-certification","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/theraleighcommons.org\/raleighpublicrecord\/news\/2012\/03\/12\/voter-ed-group-questions-wake-voting-machine-certification\/","title":{"rendered":"Voter Integrity Group Questions Wake Voting Machine Certification"},"content":{"rendered":"

Editor’s Note: In the original posting of this article, Chris Telesca was identified as a member of the NC Coalition for Verified Voting. While that is true, his statements in this story reflect his role as the founder of the Wake County Coalition for Verified Voting.<\/em><\/p>\n

Putting voting machine maintenance in the hands of local technicians is not a good idea, according to a member of a nonprofit voter integriy group.<\/p>\n

Wake County Board of Elections Director Cherie Poucher wants to certify two of her own technicians to inspect, fix and maintain the county\u2019s 248 voting machines each year.<\/p>\n

The state\u2019s voting machine company is ES&S<\/a>, which provides parts and technician services as part of its $174,000 annual contract. ES&S has maintained the machines since they were purchased in 2006.<\/p>\n

Up until recently, the state has paid for voting machine maintenance using funds from the federal Help America Vote Act.\u00a0 Right now, those funds are frozen in North Carolina because the state isn\u2019t meeting the necessary spending threshold. The state must allocate an additional $664,000 to the State Board of Elections to qualify for the $4 million in HAVA funds.<\/p>\n


\n<\/span><\/span>
Voting Machines<\/center>
\nAlthough Wake County voters use paper ballots, the county has 248 voting machines:
\n-M100 optical scan machines (the ones into which you put your ballot)
\n-Automark machines for those with disabilities
\n-Three high-speed ballot counting machines<\/span><\/div>\n

At Poucher\u2019s request for certification, ES&S offered to train her technicians through a program in Omaha, Kan. The cost is $15,000 each, an extra $5,000 annually for recertification and 60 percent of the county\u2019s $174,000 annual contract.<\/p>\n

Poucher said that offer is not reasonable; Wake County attorney Scott Warren has been negotiating with ES&S for weeks.<\/p>\n

But Chris Telesca, founder of the Wake County Coalition for Verified Voting, questions whether a county should certify its own voting machines regardless.<\/p>\n

\u201cIf the machines in Wake County have problems, who pays for it? Who pays for a statewide redo in the event of a problem in Wake County? I don\u2019t want to be on the hook for that,\u201d he said. \u201cWho\u2019s going to provide oversight at the county level if the county does their own maintenance? That\u2019s what I\u2019m worried about.\u201d<\/p>\n

Telesca argues the State Board of Elections should still have oversight of the machines, but feels his arguments for this have been met with little concern.<\/p>\n

North Carolina State Board of Elections Director Gary Bartlett told the Record said the state board has no issue with Wake County certifying its own machines.<\/p>\n

\u201cAs long as they work it out with ES&S whereas the warranty is still intact, we have no issues,\u201d he said. \u201cAs long as they are compliant with the law it\u2019s fine.\u201d<\/p>\n

However, in a letter last year to State Sen. Richard Stevens, Bartlett expressed several of the same concerns raised by Telesca, such as oversight, cost and a county\u2019s ability to handle the work.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe State Board staff must ensure that every county board is in compliance with the General Statutes, including the maintenance statute, and not causing harm to the electoral process,\u201d he wrote.<\/p>\n

Bartlett expressed similar concerns a year earlier in another letter about the issue.<\/p>\n

\u201cTo open up the maintenance to uncertified personnel places the state of North Carolina at high risk for future voting equipment failures, potential security breaches and removes the safeguard of the vendor performance bond,\u201d he wrote.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Voting machines are stacked and stored in the Elections warehouse when not in use.<\/p><\/div>\n

But Bartlett also said in his letters that if ES&S produced a certification program approved by the State Board of Elections, counties could participate and certify their own machines.<\/p>\n

Poucher said she can save the county money by having her own technicians do the work.\u00a0 Telesca has asked for a side-by-side cost comparison for the county certifying its machines versus having ES&S manage it. From parts to software to other testing, he does not believe the move will save money.<\/p>\n

Poucher also said her technicians already conduct the lion\u2019s share of the machine testing and maintenance each year. Telesca argues that the voting machine vendor technicians go through a lengthy checklist, provide parts and offer an added layer of insurance.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhat we\u2019re paying for is not just going in and cleaning out the equipment,\u201d he said. \u201cIt\u2019s a one-year, 100 percent coverage warranty. It\u2019s a promise to come in with two days, 48 hours, and fix anything that might be wrong with that equipment.\u201d<\/p>\n

ES&S could not be reached for comment about voting machine testing, or the certification program they have offered to Wake County.<\/p>\n

Bartlett said last week that Poucher is the only Elections Director in the state making the request to certify her own machines.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe county would be responsible for anything that goes wrong,\u201d he said. \u201cThe only way that we will get involved is if Wake County is not compliant with the law. But as long as Wake County and ES&S work something out … that\u2019s fine.\u201d<\/p>\n

This might all be moot if a deal can\u2019t be worked out with ES&S for local certification. Warren said this week he is still negotiating with the company.<\/p>\n

\u201cNothing has been finalized yet,\u201d he said. \u201cIf we can\u2019t come to terms, we will discuss it.\u201d<\/p>\n

He said he plans to give County Commissioners an update during their March 19 meeting, but said he may not have much of a report if negotiations are still taking place.<\/p>\n

Warren said he does not have any concerns about the county\u2019s liability if Wake begins certifying its own technicians.<\/p>\n

\u201cThey\u2019ll be certified by ES&S, so no, I don\u2019t have any liability concerns about it,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

Damon Circosta, executive director of the North Carolina Center for Voter Education<\/a>, said although he is aware of Poucher\u2019s certification request, he is not following the issue. His organization is focused more on the HAVA funding problem.<\/p>\n

\u201cCounties like Wake shouldn\u2019t be forced into this awkward decision where they\u2019ve got to pinch pennies,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

While Telesca questions Poucher\u2019s motives on this issue, one might also question the motives of Telesca, a member of the Wake County Democratic Party.<\/p>\n

He said his concern about local certification has nothing to do with politics.<\/p>\n

\u201cVoting machine repair should not be a partisan issue,\u201d he said. \u201cWhere are the answers to these questions? I\u2019m the only idiot asking them.\u201d<\/p>\n

According to Telesca, in terms of voting integrity, North Carolina went from a Florida-level joke to one of the most highly regarded states in the country.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhy mess with that?\u201d he said. \u201cEvery significant change to election law in North Carolina has gone through a piece of legislation that gets introduced on the floor, goes to the committee … and it gets debated in those committees … goes through the whole procedure. This didn\u2019t.\u201d<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A member of the NC Coalition for Verified Voting says a request from the Wake County Elections Director to certify her own machines puts unnecessary risk on the county and its taxpayers. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":24025,"featured_media":10312,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[446,15],"tags":[189,197,474],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/theraleighcommons.org\/raleighpublicrecord\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10571"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/theraleighcommons.org\/raleighpublicrecord\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/theraleighcommons.org\/raleighpublicrecord\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/theraleighcommons.org\/raleighpublicrecord\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/24025"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/theraleighcommons.org\/raleighpublicrecord\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10571"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/theraleighcommons.org\/raleighpublicrecord\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10571\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/theraleighcommons.org\/raleighpublicrecord\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/10312"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/theraleighcommons.org\/raleighpublicrecord\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10571"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/theraleighcommons.org\/raleighpublicrecord\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10571"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/theraleighcommons.org\/raleighpublicrecord\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10571"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}