H E L P A M E R I C A V O T E A C T STATE PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING R E P O R T E R ' S T R A N S C R I P T - - - - - October 12, 2006 9:00 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. Miami Marriott Biscayne Bay Miami, Florida - - - - - 2 1 HELP AMERICA VOTE ACT 2 STATE OF FLORIDA PLANNING COMMITTEE MEMBERS 3 OCTOBER 2006 4 5 6 CHAIRMAN: 7 Jim Smith Smith and Ballard 8 Tallahassee, Florida 9 10 Members: 11 Lester Sola Bill Posey Supervisor of Elections State Senator, District 24 12 Miami-Dade County Rockledge, Florida 13 Brenda Snipes Ron Reagan 14 Supervisor of Elections Representative, District 67 Broward County Sarasota, Florida 15 16 Terry Vaughan Richard Perez, Esq. Supervisor of Elections Holland & Knight 17 Bradford County Miami, Florida 18 Kurt Browning Alec Yasinsac 19 Supervisor of Elections Florida State University Pasco County Tallahassee, Florida 20 21 Jim Kracht Sallie Parks Miami, Florida Palm Harbor, Florida 22 23 Richard La Belle Reggie Mitchell Family Network on Florida Legal Counsel 24 Disabilities of Florida People for the American Way Clearwater, Florida Foundation 25 Tallahassee, Florida 3 1 ALSO PRESENT: 2 Honorable Sue Cobb Secretary of State 3 4 Collins Center: 5 Mark Pritchett Tracey Lowe 6 Rod Petrey 7 8 Department of State Staff: 9 Sarah Jane Bradshaw Barbara Leonard 10 Maria Matthews David Drury 11 Heidi Hughes Dawn Roberts 12 Peggy Taff 13 14 15 16 Professor Susan MacManus University of South Florida 17 18 19 20 Speakers from the Public: 21 Juanda Ferguson, Citizen Alvaro F. Fernandez, Advancement Project 22 Nyana Miller, Project Vote Edmund Campbell, AFL-CIO 23 Sandy Wayland, Miami-Dade Election Reform Pamela Haengel, Voting Integrity Alliance - Tampa 24 Terry Cobb, League of Women Voters Muslima Lewis, American Civil Liberties Union 25 4 1 A G E N D A 2 HELP AMERICA VOTE ACT STATE PLANNING COMMITTEE 3 A G E N D A 4 5 I. Welcome and Introduction 6 Chairman Jim Smith HAVA Planning Committee 7 8 II. Opening Comments 9 The Honorable Sue Cobb Secretary of State 10 11 III. Finalize Pending Issue from Pensacola Meeting 12 IV. Update Ongoing HAVA Activities 13 Element 3 - Voter Education, Election 14 Official & Poll Worker Training 15 Element 5 - HAVA Election Fund 16 Element 6 - HAVA Budget 17 Element 10 - Title I Budget and Activities 18 Element 7 - Florida's Maintenance of Effort 19 Element 9 - Administrative Complaint Procedures 20 Element 13 - HAVA Planning Committee and 21 Procedures 22 Element 11 - HAVA State Plan Management 23 Element 12 - HAVA Changes to State Plan 24 25 5 1 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Good morning everybody. 2 Secretary of State Cobb is a little bit 3 delayed but she asked me to go ahead and start, and when 4 she arrives we will obviously stop and we will have some 5 comments from her. 6 I appreciate everybody being here and I 7 think we can finish up without too much delay today. 8 One thing I wanted to just mention, and 9 I think everybody here already knows, people are not 10 here for public testimony yet, but later on I'll comment 11 about the limited purpose this committee really has. 12 We're not an election reform committee involved in the 13 election process. We are here to make sure we meet the 14 requirements of the Help America Vote Act and that's 15 what we intend to do. 16 So with that, we will go ahead and have 17 our first comments. 18 Mark, who's up first? 19 MR. PRITCHETT: Tracey. 20 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Anybody on the committee 21 want to comment? 22 MR. PRITCHETT: Mr. Chairman, if I could 23 comment for one minute. We have our sign interpreter. 24 Richard, what's the proper protocol? 25 MR. LA BELLE: The proper protocol is for the 6 1 sign interpreter to see if anyone needs the services 2 right now. 3 MR. PRITCHETT: No one needs it. 4 CHAIRMAN SMITH: That's fine. We will do the 5 same thing as last time. 6 MS. LOWE: The first thing I want to do, 7 there are a couple of things from the meeting that we 8 want to finalize before we move on to the new elements 9 for this meeting. 10 The first thing in your materials on 11 Page 3, is Element 1, Use of Title III Requirements 12 Payments. The committee asks that language be added to 13 encourage improvements to accessible voting technology, 14 so at the bottom of that page we added a paragraph that 15 indicates the State Planning Committee will encourage -- 16 will ask the legislature to encourage vendors to 17 continue to develop enhancements of new technologies and 18 they also encourage the Division of Elections to 19 continuously review and update voting systems 20 certifications. 21 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Do we have any questions? 22 MR. SOLA: Can you address what that 23 language is directed to? 24 MS. LOWE: There's a comment that we had 25 deleted the paragraph above it and, Richard, you wanted 7 1 to make sure that we had something in there that we 2 wanted to continue encouragement of new technology or 3 just eliminate it completely? 4 MR. BROWNING: I believe that would include 5 the specific advancements that are currently on the 6 market right now. 7 MR. SOLA: I wanted to make sure those were 8 on the record. 9 MR. MITCHELL: I was real specific about 10 this, that it allows counties to choose whether optical 11 scan or paper ballot, or whatever they choose to use, 12 that only DRE systems are compliant with HAVA. We ought 13 to encourage those counties to be able to use their 14 current systems and allow for the integrity and the 15 independence for the disabled and other voters to use 16 the current system, whether it's optical scan or 17 whatever they use. 18 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Any more questions or 19 comments? Any objection? With no objection, we will go 20 to the next. 21 MS. LOWE: On Page 4 there's some discussion 22 about whether we wanted to always follow EAC. 23 requirements. Our concern was this might be difficult 24 for counties. They may have to replace the entire 25 equipment. That it was a little too restrictive for the 8 1 county to make sure that they were in compliance so we 2 added a paragraph where we say the Division of Elections 3 is committed to periodic update of its voting standards 4 and they are not bound by the guidelines of the EAC. To 5 the extent possible, they will consider these standards 6 for updates. It's a way to try to maintain the EAC 7 standards without completely being bound by it. 8 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Any questions or comments? 9 With no objection, we will include that. 10 MS. LOWE: The next section is security and 11 Mark will address that. 12 MR. PRITCHETT: Thank you. 13 Mr. Chairman, the document that you're 14 passing around right now is two state revisions, 15 something that you all have received initially. I think 16 it was last Friday. So there have been a few minor 17 changes to it and I want to make sure we have the latest 18 copy. We also have them available for the public 19 outside so they know we are working on the one with the 20 sort of the orange writing that's replaced it. 21 This document that you have right now 22 is the technological component of our Florida Voter 23 Registration System and at the last meeting we didn't 24 have a chance to really deal with that because there 25 were some confidential issues that we had to overcome in 9 1 order to be able to write something up and have you look 2 at it. But this particular piece finds that Florida is 3 in compliance with the adequate security measures. 4 First of all, if Florida conducts a 5 risk analysis, it requires all agencies to conduct a 6 risk analysis of their computer system and that's what's 7 highlighted in the first paragraph. 8 In the second paragraph, there's some 9 explanation that the Department of State required the 10 Auditor General to audit the Florida Voter Registration 11 System in the spring and the report was made final I 12 think in June, and they pointed out some weaknesses in 13 the system, and the department has since taken some 14 corrective steps to make sure those items have been 15 clarified. 16 Some of the items that have been 17 clarified, they have a security plan in place. Every 18 supervisor of election is required to file a Memorandum 19 of Understanding with the Department of State with the 20 proper security measures for this Voter Registration 21 System, and there's also been a chief information 22 officer, security manager hired to oversee the security 23 functions for the Voter Registration System. 24 Finally under risk management, the 25 Department has started putting together or put together 10 1 their disaster planning module for the Florida Voter 2 Registration System. In case some catastrophic event 3 happens, measures will be taken. 4 On the second page there's the item 5 regarding the IT Governance Model, the Florida Voter 6 Registration System is consistent with the voluntary 7 standards of the Federal Elections Assistance 8 Commission's guidelines. 9 There's protection from authorizing 10 illegal access to the Voter Registration System and this 11 is all documented by the Legal Department of the 12 Division of Elections. 13 And for every transaction that takes 14 place within the Florida Voter Registration System, 15 there's a history recorded so that there's documentation 16 for every kind of access or change or something that 17 takes place where they can go back and audit something 18 if they need to audit it or find a weakness or 19 something. 20 Is there anybody from the Department 21 that would like to speak to that right now or is that 22 correct? 23 MS. ROBERTS: That's correct. 24 MR. PRITCHETT: And then in terms of data 25 integrity, which is required by HAVA, the Department of 11 1 State, which has very stringent standards for removing 2 registered voters that shouldn't be there -- and we went 3 over those in details last week -- we have cooperative 4 agreements with Florida Department of Law Enforcement, 5 with the Social Security -- and they have one with the 6 Social Security Administration and Department of Public 7 Health. We went over a lot of those items last week. 8 And the Department has written agreements with the 9 Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles to make 10 sure that this is done. 11 So this is all spelled out for you in 12 that document and if you want to take a few minutes and 13 review it, the orange changes are the most recent ones. 14 Everything else you've had since last Friday. And we've 15 really relied on the Division of Elections' legal office 16 to help us with this. 17 Are there any questions? 18 MR. POSEY: The voter list, they're 19 maintained on line? 20 MR. PRITCHETT: That's correct. 21 MS. ROBERTS: Not on line. It's not 22 connected to the Internet in any way. 23 MR. PRITCHETT: You meant the Internet. It's 24 a closed system on line. 25 MR. POSEY: Are there any ballots 12 1 transmitted on line even in a closed system that you 2 know of in any county anywhere? 3 MS. ROBERTS: The FVRS oversees absentee 4 ballots and there are provisions in law that allow you 5 to request it via e-mail and by fax, and then the 6 absentee ballot can only be done fax. You have to fax 7 it back. You cannot e-mail an absentee ballot. 8 MR. POSEY: That's the only exception? Thank 9 you. 10 MR. SOLA: Mr. Chair, you had mentioned in 11 your presentation that the legislature required you to 12 sign off that they are in agreement with the provisions 13 of the Division's policies. Can we get an update as far 14 as how far along we are in compliance with all the 15 supervisors of elections on that? 16 MS. MATTHEWS: Maria Matthews with the 17 Department of State. 18 All 67 county supervisors of elections 19 have signed off on the Memorandum of Understanding such 20 that protocols and guidelines require it. Our chief 21 information management officer will be responsible for 22 providing assistance as needed and eventually developing 23 a training program for each of the local security 24 officers. 25 MR. SOLA: Thank you. 13 1 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Any more questions? 2 MR. YASINSAC: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On 3 the security protocol, we talked about standard 4 technology and security protocols. I wonder if we cite 5 that standard that we do someplace and what standards 6 were used because I see later on its added security 7 measure so I take it it's added security measures to the 8 standards that we impose there. Do we have a reference 9 somewhere? 10 MS. ROBERTS: I will have to get that from 11 the chief officer. 12 MR. PRITCHETT: Would you like to add that as 13 part of the planning document where it stands? 14 MR. YASINSAC: It seems that should be 15 referenced somewhere. It's a standard. People should 16 be able to go to that standard and see what it is. 17 MR. LA BELLE: I have a question about the 18 process of comparison of records with the FDLE. Now it 19 talks about comparisons against felony conviction data. 20 Now, my organization has been working with FDLE and I 21 know there's often a problem with the individual law 22 enforcement agencies around the state reporting -- I 23 don't want to say accurate data, but timely data. 24 In other words, if someone is arrested 25 for a felony, oftentimes the disposition information is 14 1 not reported to the FDLE to be reflected in their 2 database in a timely manner. Sometimes it's never 3 reported. 4 Could someone please describe whether 5 we are actually just comparing data against felony 6 convictions or is this based on felony arrests that may 7 pop up, that the issue of disposition then may have some 8 importance. 9 MS. MATTHEWS: Maria Matthews with the 10 Department of State. 11 The process initiates with an automated 12 comparison with FDLE database, but then we undergo a 13 very extensive, credible and reliable test process that 14 involves people and they end up making sure that they 15 get documentation that substantiates what they have 16 found from that initial comparison, so it's not just an 17 automated process so we have to go and get an actual 18 judgment. 19 We find out if there's anything that 20 has been updated since then, including whether the 21 person has gotten clemency. I mean, we make sure we get 22 documentation that confirms what we have found and only 23 then are we comfortable enough to be able to send that 24 on to the Supervisor of Elections for process. 25 MR. LA BELLE: So all those steps are taken 15 1 before anybody is removed? 2 MS. MATTHEWS: Absolutely, and the law 3 provides very specific notice and removal process. So 4 we start with that automated process and then there's 5 that credible and viable manual review, and only then, 6 once we are comfortable that we have put together a 7 pretty good package that we feel good about, that this 8 person is who we think it is, and that they do have some 9 grounds for ineligibility, then that's sent on to the 10 supervisor and the supervisor has a statutory obligation 11 and timeline with which to send notice. It has to be 12 actual. If it's not actual, it has to be constructive 13 and so on. So there's a good due process procedure in 14 place. 15 MR. LA BELLE: Thank you. 16 MR. BROWNING: Mr. Chairman, let me 17 reiterate, the felon process now -- actually I busted 18 the division's chops with it but it is so overkill, but 19 it's a positive overkill. There has not been a felony 20 package sent to PASCO that we have found that's not been 21 factual. And the process today is much more 22 streamlined, much more accurate. It's not looking at 23 one set of records but a series of databases. And then 24 not only that, it's not the computer making the decision 25 but actually physically someone in the Department has 16 1 looked at it and the individual supervisors. It's very, 2 very concrete. 3 MS. MATTHEWS: And, even more importantly, 4 the opportunity for the voter to come back and say, "No, 5 this is not me." 6 MR. MITCHELL: If for some strange reason the 7 voter decides to mail all the statutory requirements, is 8 not made aware of the problem until they show up on the 9 day of election and, you know, the information says 10 they're dead or they're a felon, is it possible -- does 11 the local supervisor of elections have flexibility if 12 they have proof certain that they are that person and 13 they are alive and not a felon to be able to vote a 14 regular ballot that day? 15 MS. MATTHEWS: A regular ballot? 16 MR. BROWNING: No, they would vote a 17 provisional ballot and that ballot would be reviewed 18 based on the evidence submitted by that voter. 19 MS. MATTHEWS: But they have up to five p.m. 20 the day following the election. 21 MR. BROWNING: And just as aside note, I 22 think it's important to note that provisional ballots 23 are ballots. Provisional ballots are not ballots that 24 are held to a lower or even a higher standard than any 25 ballot cast on election day. 17 1 So I think provisional ballots is 2 problematic from an administrative standpoint as can 3 be. I think it's a very encouraging piece of our system 4 so that it eliminates what you were referring to. So it 5 is a stop gap. People are not not given the opportunity 6 to cast a ballot. 7 MR. MITCHELL: The only problem I see with 8 the provisional ballot is that unfortunately in the 9 state statute if you are not in the proper precinct, 10 even if you are directed by staff, or if you weren't 11 sent a voter information card and it happens to be the 12 wrong location, if you are not in the exact precinct 13 where you ought to be, that provisional ballot is 14 required to be thrown out and we saw a lot thrown out in 15 2001, 2002. 16 MR. BROWNING: Let's be careful with the 17 term "thrown out." They were not counted but they 18 weren't thrown out. 19 MR. MITCHELL: I'll be clear, they were not 20 counted and I guess that's the bottom line. 21 MR. BROWNING: And that was a legislative 22 issue. That is purely a legislative issue. The 23 legislature decided that's the way it's going to be 24 counted. That's not something we deal with as a HAVA 25 committee but that is an issue that the legislature 18 1 looks at. 2 MR. MITCHELL: It seems to me we can make 3 recommendations to the legislature -- 4 CHAIRMAN SMITH: No, no, we're not getting 5 into that. We're here to do the HAVA report. We are 6 not here to make recommendations to anybody. We'll be 7 here for weeks. I'm county commissioner and I don't 8 mind doing that again but that's not why we're here. 9 MR. POSEY: Just to comment, the legislature 10 debated that question long and hard and their example 11 was the Kennedy Space Center. If we have 20,000 12 employees and the 20,000 employees were theoretically 13 allowed to stop and cast a ballot at the first precinct 14 they left just to get it out of the way, obviously it 15 would be overwhelmingly and it would be a system that 16 the supervisors could not anticipate. 17 The idea now if you're in the wrong 18 precinct, they tell you where to go to the correct 19 precinct, and I was not aware that a lot of ballots were 20 not counted if someone went to the wrong precinct. That 21 would be important for us to know and address somehow. 22 MR. MITCHELL: The Division of Elections is 23 here. Do you have information of how many were 24 disallowed due to going to the wrong precinct? 25 MS. ROBERTS: We would have to go back. We 19 1 collected a lot of data from 2004 regarding provisional 2 ballots. I can tell you just from my memory -- and 3 maybe one of the supervisors can help me with this -- is 4 that most of the provisional ballots appear to be 5 because the person just wasn't registered to vote 6 period. 7 And, then, yes, there were provisional 8 ballots that were obviously given out because the person 9 was in the wrong precinct. Unfortunately in 2004 as 10 well what we found out was because of the attention that 11 Florida was receiving in that presidential election, and 12 that we have a lot of folks around the state who may not 13 have been quite attuned to our laws, that they were 14 advising people outside of the polling places to go back 15 in and cast provisional ballots even though they were 16 not in the right precinct. 17 So the data of 2004, we can go back, it 18 may be an anomaly because of what was going on in 19 Florida at that time. But by and large, it's usually 20 because the person is not registered to vote. 21 MR. MITCHELL: You think it's possible to 22 make a call and verify that information while we're here 23 today? 24 MS. ROBERTS: I can call my office to see if 25 it's something that we reported to the Elections 20 1 Assistance Commission because there was a survey they 2 sent to all the states. If it's not in there, it's 3 something we have to provide to you via e-mail while 4 you're looking at one through four. 5 MR. POSEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 6 Could you give us data of people 7 thinking they were registered to vote that were, in 8 fact, not registered to vote, which some of us think is 9 due to people doing registration drives and not turning 10 in the registration of people who may not have agreed 11 with their political pursuasion, which we tried to 12 address legislatively and the court just threw out. 13 MS. ROBERTS: Certainly. I can call our 14 office and see whether or not it's in our EAC report. 15 MR. VAUGHAN: The overriding issue with 16 provisional ballots is that if a person ever shows up at 17 the wrong precinct and would be allowed to vote with a 18 provisional ballot in counties with single member 19 districts, obviously in most cases they would be given a 20 ballot, they would have * on their ballot that would 21 make them be ineligible to vote and that's an overriding 22 issue, to get the person in the right precinct so they 23 can cast a ballot if they were from a single member 24 district. 25 MR. PEREZ: I think the State of Florida is 21 1 way ahead of other states in the way they treat 2 provisional ballots. Many states do not give the voter 3 the avenue, the opportunity to come back to the 4 supervisor with information about their eligibility. 5 The state took aggressive steps in order to provide a 6 real backstop to voters by providing a very detailed 7 process in terms of giving the voter information about 8 their right of provisional ballots if it was to cast a 9 provisional ballot. It gives them a certain amount of 10 time to get information back to the supervisor. 11 It's a real backstop, unlike other 12 states where you cast a provisional ballot and there is 13 no backstop for the voters to give information or gather 14 information and take it to the supervisors, so I think 15 the State should be applauded for really taking -- 16 really taking the process of provisional ballots 17 seriously and providing with backstops. 18 MR. MITCHELL: The State ought to be 19 applauded but one of my concerns, again, is in some of 20 the precincts where we monitor some of the voting going 21 on, transportation issues are a problem. There's a 22 sense of apathy that a person knows they are registered 23 to vote and for whatever reason they're told that they 24 can't vote and they have to vote with a provisional 25 ballot. 22 1 It's my understanding that even if they 2 provided information right there at the polling 3 location, they still have to come back a second time, 4 and for those folks with transportation issues, that 5 seems to be that the voter registration is turning off a 6 lot of voters, that it's too much trouble, and then 7 there's this perception that it's an effort to keep them 8 from voting. 9 MS. PARKS: Reggie, if you don't mind, I'd 10 like to point out that we are not telling voters that 11 they can't vote -- 12 MR. MITCHELL: Right. 13 MS. PARKS: -- but they are given the option 14 of a provisional ballot. It's not that they can't vote 15 because those provisional ballots, as pointed out 16 earlier, is a very important piece to the whole voting 17 system. 18 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Any more comments? 19 MR. PEREZ: One more comment. 20 I think if we isolate the particular 21 aspect of the voting process and just look at that 22 aspect, we can always pick apart that particular aspect 23 of the voting process. 24 But you have to look at it as an entire 25 voting process. Those people that have problems with 23 1 transportation, they are given an opportunity to vote 2 early. They are given an opportunity to vote by 3 absentee ballot. You have to look at the entirety. 4 There are going to be individual 5 aspects, individual voters that may be hurt by a 6 particular aspect of the process, but you have to look 7 at it as a whole. 8 Certainly, as I said, I think the State 9 should be applauded for all the efforts made since 2000, 10 to be able to give the voters a no-fault absentee 11 ballot, this provisional voting, and you have to take a 12 look at it as a whole. I think certainly we can all 13 agree that if we take a look at the whole, it's made 14 enormous progress -- enormous progress of making the 15 election process more accessible. 16 MS. MATTHEWS: If I may, Chairman, two 17 points. We have the pre-access system whereby a person 18 who votes a provisional ballot finds out why their 19 ballot wasn't counted. And my second point -- I can't 20 remember. I'll have to bring it up later. Sorry. 21 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Is that all? 22 MR. PRITCHETT: One other point. Under the 23 Data Integrity, the Department will also -- we're going 24 to review certifications. As well, the supervisors, in 25 their list of maintenance procedures, they're going to 24 1 do periodic reviews of that, probably much to the 2 chagrin of people like Kurt. See, you weren't 3 listening. 4 MR. BROWNING: I was speaking to the 5 secretary. 6 MR. PRITCHETT: But actually we put this 7 before you. 8 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Hearing no objection then, 9 we will include that. 10 MS. ROBERTS: With the one thing that 11 Mr. Yasinsac talked about with some of the security 12 measure standards that are used. 13 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Our Secretary of State, Sue 14 Cobb has arrived and we are very happy to hear your 15 comments. 16 SECRETARY COBB: My first comment is I 17 apologize to the panel here for being late. It's quite 18 embarrassing since this is my hometown and I can't find 19 my way around. Maybe I can blame it on county 20 officials. There's so much going on here, all the 21 cranes, but I do apologize. I left home early and I 22 couldn't put it together. 23 I wanted to thank you all for serving. 24 I was unable to attend the meeting in Pensacola but I 25 got a full report on it, and we appreciate you taking 25 1 your time and putting so much thought into the process 2 that we're going through here and the requirements that 3 we have to meet as a state relating to federal law so I 4 thank you for that. I know that the chairman is going a 5 fine job and I will just observe and listen and turn it 6 back to you, Jim. 7 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Thank you very much. I 8 believe this group asked lots of question. This will be 9 clearly scrubbed before we finish. 10 MR. PRITCHETT: This is the last issue from 11 Pensacola. It's Element 8, Performance Measures, on 12 Page 7 of your assignment and pending issues from 13 Pensacola. At the last meeting in Pensacola I asked the 14 Committee if they had any particular recommendations and 15 there was one made that I'll refer to in a moment. 16 Other than that, I went through and 17 updated some of the language on Page 7 to indicate the 18 current state of affairs in Florida. 19 Then on Page 8, there are no changes 20 but there is a typo at the bottom of Page 8 under 21 "Accountable official" on the left-hand column. That 22 should be "Chief of Voting Systems Certification," and 23 I'll make that change for the committee, instead of 24 "Chief Bureau of Voter Registration" so that's a 25 technical issue that I'll deal with. 26 1 There were no changes to Page 9 in 2 terms of performance measures. That's an ongoing 3 process now that the State is undergoing. 4 On Page 10 there were some major 5 changes. We now comply with HAVA on the certified 6 voting systems with voters with disabilities. This goal 7 has been achieved and we reflected it in the update. 8 On Page 11, no changes to -- well, one 9 change to provisional voting. Senator Posey recommended 10 that we try to capture the reason why the person voted a 11 provisional ballot, and so we added that measure in here 12 and for the local supervisors and for the Department to 13 try to capture this, so we have that measure in there. 14 On Page 12 under the Florida Voter 15 Registration System, this is the one that we have the 16 most changes. We now comply with HAVA single, uniform, 17 official centralized, interactive computerized, 18 statewide registration list known as the Florida Voter 19 Registration System. This goal has been achieved. It 20 became operational in January as required by HAVA and we 21 are continuing to monitor our maintenance functions and 22 make sure we comply with the security polices and 23 operations of HAVA. That will be ongoing. 24 And then on Page 13 we now have the 25 chief of the Bureau of Voter Registration Services which 27 1 is responsible and accountable for and operational under 2 the secretary and director of Division of Election 3 Supervisors. 4 On Page 14, just a couple of minor 5 changes. There are more technical changes than anything 6 else. 7 And no changes on Page 15 in terms of 8 performance measures. 9 No changes on Pages 16 or 17 to the 10 previous Help America Vote Act Plan. 11 CHAIRMAN SMITH: That was Element 3? 12 MR. PRITCHETT: Element 8, "Performance Goals 13 and Measures," and what changes did we make as a 14 committee in 2006. Most of the state impact is we met 15 the new HAVA requirements in January 2006 and so we 16 changed those. 17 MR. BROWNING: So if I understand correctly, 18 the pending issues from our Pensacola meeting that have 19 been addressed in this, I assume we need to adopt these. 20 MR. PRITCHETT: That's correct. 21 MR. BROWNING: I make a motion that we adopt 22 the changes. 23 MS. PARKS: I second. 24 MR. SOLA: We have the language issue on the 25 optical readers. Can we get an update on that? 28 1 MS. ROBERTS: For the record, Dawn Roberts 2 with the Division of Elections. 3 Yes, Supervisor Sola, we have been in 4 contact with one of the major vendors that's here in 5 Florida. As of this time that is not a functionality 6 that's currently available. I believe you indicated 7 that your staff had done some research and we wanted to 8 continue to work with you on that. 9 There seems to be -- what we have been 10 able to ascertain -- some not confusion, but this is an 11 element that we hear from some counties, that this is a 12 tool for the poll worker. And I think what you are 13 indicating is that there may be a privacy issue and that 14 this is something that they need to think ahead, that 15 this needs to be provided in another language should it 16 be necessary for the voter himself or herself to get 17 that -- actually look at that notice that is printed on 18 the tabulator, so we continue to work with that issue. 19 Right now what we're hearing is that 20 none of the vendors that are currently operating in 21 Florida have something for the Division for that 22 functionality, but it is certainly something that we 23 will continue to work with your office and might be 24 something that the legislature will have to address as 25 well. 29 1 MR. SOLA: Thank you, Dawn. 2 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Any more questions or 3 comments? We have a motion to second those objections 4 that were carried over from Pensacola. 5 MR. PRITCHETT: We have a few people arrive 6 so I wanted to make sure no one needs assistance. 7 Thank you. 8 CHAIRMAN SMITH: We have Susan MacManus who 9 is the guru on politics in Florida. 10 MS. MACMANUS: Educated people, hopefully. 11 CHAIRMAN SMITH: It be a lot more interesting 12 if we could talk about the elections. 13 MS. MACMANUS: For the record, Susan 14 MacManus, University of South Florida. 15 I'm here to talk about what we are 16 adding and changing and updating to Element 2 -- excuse 17 me, Element 3, Voter Education, Election Official 18 Information & Poll Worker Training. 19 I'll just summarize the major changes, 20 and if you want to look through it, we can go back and 21 talk about specifics. 22 What we did is update the language so, 23 for example -- update it in terms of inclusiveness of 24 legislative sessions. 25 We changed a lot of the former bill 30 1 references to actual statutes. 2 We added examples of the voter 3 education activities that are being engaged in by the 4 supervisors in 2006. And I did ask the Division of 5 Elections to submit to me all 67 county voter education 6 plans and I did read through all of those, and the 7 examples that you see here are abstracted from those 8 plans. 9 We also added the legislative funding 10 figures for 2006 both for voter education and also poll 11 worker training. 12 We added new legislation regarding, 13 first of all, uniformed poll worker training curriculum 14 and poll worker training manual, requirements that were 15 established by the legislature. 16 Other new aspiration referenced here, 17 requirement for continual reevaluation of voter 18 registration activities after the election, including 19 recommendations to the legislature for future 20 legislation. 21 We added legislation regarding the 22 expansion of the list of voter rights to include voter 23 questions about identity. 24 We added requirements by the 25 legislature for posting of several new kinds of 31 1 information at the polling place itself. 2 MR. SOLA: Mr. Chair, pardon me for 3 interrupting. When you say you added, can you refer at 4 what page you're speaking from so we can follow up. 5 MS. MACMANUS: Would you like me to back up? 6 I'm trying to give you the brief rundown of what we did. 7 MR. SOLA: Okay. 8 MS. MACMANUS: The new things that must be 9 posted at a precinct and at the polling place is voter 10 procedure instructions including where that's to be 11 relative to where a person arrives to vote. In other 12 words, they have to have a chance to go through those 13 before they get to the actual equipment. 14 We have to have information available 15 and constitutional amendments at the polling place and 16 also posted penalties for voter fraud. 17 The legislature has also clarified the 18 format for printed instructions for absentee voters 19 requiring the voter ID the exact and now acceptable 20 forms of identification. 21 And just a couple of other things 22 here. We also include the legislation requirements and 23 instructions to absentee voters to carefully read the 24 instructions before they fill out an absentee ballot and 25 to complete their voter certificate, and then the detail 32 1 of voter certificate for early voters. 2 And just a couple of other things that 3 are not legislative in nature, we updated the 4 information about what the Florida Association -- State 5 Association of Supervisor of Elections has done with 6 their Get Out the Vote Foundation. It includes their 7 plans for 2006, and I think that that's just about the 8 major changes that have been made. 9 So, now, sir, I'd be glad to go back 10 through and point out a couple of things you want to 11 look at. 12 You want to look at the new legislation 13 on uniform poll worker training -- Curriculum and Poll 14 Worker Training Manual. That begins on -- there's a 15 reference to it on Page 4, and that has been done. 16 And the reference also to the State 17 Poll Workers Training Manual, which I have had the 18 opportunity to work on that project, and I'm very 19 familiar with where it is. I think it's in the final 20 stages now. It's the third brief reading and we did 21 present that to the Association of Supervisors of 22 Elections at their meeting this summer so they have had 23 a chance to put on that. 24 CHAIRMAN SMITH: I'd like to ask the 25 supervisors on the committee here, have you made real 33 1 progress in poll worker training? I know that was one 2 of the provisions about you going back and we identified 3 that as a major problem, how to better train the poll 4 worker. 5 MR. BROWNING: I believe we have made 6 progress. I believe we have made progress I think with 7 the minimum hours that have been established by the 8 legislature through election reform in '01. 9 I think supervisors have done a better 10 job at educating their voters how important a role they 11 play on election day and it's not just something that 12 you just do, that a lot rides on what you do at the 13 polls on election day. 14 I think the quality of the training 15 material is getting better, but I think poll worker 16 training is much better today. A lot of things changed 17 after the 2000 elections and things we took for granted 18 we don't take for granted any more. 19 MS. MACMANUS: Nice visuals come with the 20 manual. People are visual today. One of the things 21 that I like about the training manual -- and some of the 22 supervisors have used -- is situations -- real life 23 situations where you have people act out how they would 24 solve the problem that occurs in the polling place. 25 That's the practical side of training that has been 34 1 lacking in the past that I think is really a good 2 addition. 3 It's still a very, very difficult task, 4 no question about it, and some of the things that I hear 5 just going out and about are the requirements now of 6 poll workers to know everything is now starting to have 7 an impact on the ability of supervisors to recruit poll 8 workers. 9 MR. SOLA: I want to comment on Supervisor 10 Browning's comment to you. The focus on training has 11 really increased to a level where average, 12 just-getting-by is not good enough because that has come 13 back to haunt us in the past. 14 The focus is really on the lead time on 15 training to really be viable. I do have one comment 16 with regard to the report. It does mention prior to 17 November 7th elections, counties like Miami-Dade County 18 are already involved in training poll workers. Are we 19 looking to shift that back or -- 20 MS. MACMANUS: Well, most have the draft. 21 All the supervisors were given the draft after the last 22 meeting and some people have already adopted it and are 23 using it. The Florida Training Manual, which is really 24 mostly for the trainer, it has not been formally 25 released, to my knowledge, but we're in the final stages 35 1 of it. I've referred to it 100 times. 2 MS. ROBERTS: For the record, Supervisor 3 Sola, I'm not sure that it's actually going to be 4 disseminated to the counties, the final product part, to 5 the General Election because we have extended the 6 contract now. I believe that the deadline is October 7 31st so that's probably unrealistic. 8 The appropriation that provided this 9 project did not give a deadline so the reality is that 10 this is not a tool -- in its final stages going to be 11 used in this election, but much of what's in that 12 curriculum is being done by the county. This is 13 certainly something that we'll be presenting again at 14 your conference in late November. 15 MR. SOLA: I would just ask if that's the 16 date, at least for the final review that a draft be 17 provided by X date and we can anticipate a final version 18 being distributed to the supervisors. It doesn't have 19 to be a specific date. It could be the fall, spring, 20 summer, fall, whatever you want, but we need to put 21 everyone on notice that the supervisors are having a 22 draft the next day, that the final version is 23 forthcoming. 24 MR. BROWNING: One quick comment, and 25 Dr. MacManus hit on it. The poll worker recruitment 36 1 training, although the legislature has bolstered that 2 whole aspect of it -- if there's any part of the 3 election that's problematic is the recruitment and 4 training of poll workers because we're training these 5 folks -- and most of them, with all due respect, are 6 senior folks and we can't do without them, but we are 7 expecting some high level of competency with so limited 8 amount of training and it impacts the whole process. 9 When you get into situations like 10 Dr. MacManus mentioned, the role-playing and the 11 situational stuff, that's great and we are doing more of 12 that, but in and of itself, when you are training 2,000 13 people, you have to start your training literally year 14 round to do that. It's not something we used to do a 15 week before elections. It's an incredible task. 16 MS. MACMANUS: Moving on to other specifics. 17 The requirements for constant reevaluation of voter 18 registration activities are listed twice, once on Page 5 19 and again on Page 12. 20 Page 5 has a substantial paragraph 21 there which reports the language of the statutes 22 requiring the constant reevaluation and the requirement 23 for new recommendations, makes the whole voter 24 registration process a very dynamic one, constantly 25 updated, and I think I've watched this whole process 37 1 since the 2000 election and look forward to the reports 2 myself as an academic and I find that very useful. 3 The next one is expansion of the list 4 of voter's rights to an explanation if his or her 5 registration or identity is in question, and that's on 6 Page 7 and this adds to that. The former language was 7 just registration of the list of voter's rights which 8 gave people a right to an explanation if their 9 registration was in question but this adds to that 10 language "if their identities are in question" and 11 that's a statutory change. 12 Next is the expansion of posting this 13 information at polling places. That begins on Page 7. 14 MR. YASINSAC: Mr. Chair, if I might. With 15 electronic voting coming of age here, it may be that 16 that provision needs to be -- certainly the legislature 17 needs to look at it, and I'll be careful not to make a 18 recommendation about that, but what we might need to do 19 here is do a little bit of research and see if the 20 penalties for tampering with the electronic system -- 21 federal electronic system might provide larger, heftier 22 penalties than what is here in terms of a third degree 23 felony. 24 MS. MACMANUS: Thank you. 25 As you see here, there are three new 38 1 requirements that must be provided to the voter at the 2 voting place, and, of course, we mentioned each of them 3 but here they are in the text itself. 4 The first thing is instructions about 5 the voting system, the availability of information about 6 the proposed constitutional amendments, and posting 7 information about the penalty for vote fraud. 8 In terms of instructions to and 9 clarification and more explicit instructions for 10 absentee voters on Page 8, it's the third paragraph up 11 from the bottom which tells exactly the language of the 12 format that's being used on the printed instructions 13 that are being mailed out to absentee ballot voters -- 14 absentee voters and also includes the language 15 clarifying the various type of photograph identification 16 that's acceptable. 17 On Page 9 you'll see again statutory 18 language requiring supervisors in the information they 19 send out to absentee ballots. It requires one to 20 carefully read the instruction before they fill out the 21 ballot, and the paragraph beneath that talks about the 22 requirements for the format and the language to be used 23 on the Early Voting Voter Certificate. 24 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Questions from anyone? 25 MS. MACMANUS: On Page 11, it's something 39 1 that I neglected to mention initially. There was an 2 Auditor General Report which signified to the Division 3 that they need to take a careful look at the monitoring 4 for the voter education plans of the county and the 5 Department of State has agreed to look at those more 6 carefully. 7 And I can attest from looking at all 67 8 of the documents that I can see where there have been 9 phone conversations with the individual supervisors and 10 the person -- the supervisor of elections had either 11 okay'd it or pointed out that something that had been on 12 the plan was ineligible in the funding and so this 13 process is now in place from my reading of the 67 county 14 plans. 15 On Page 9, you will see another 16 addition which is to update the inclusion of the types 17 of information available on the Division of Elections' 18 web page, and you'll see in the underscore all the 19 different things that are included now. It's a very 20 good website. 21 And I think also the importance is, for 22 the disability community, that the site also has a link 23 to the Advocacy Center for Persons With Disabilities. 24 And I also am very appreciative of the 25 inclusion of the Constitutional Amendment Booklet, which 40 1 is something as an academic I've been asking for a long 2 time. 3 On Page 10, the addition of the Get Out 4 The Vote Foundation as they did in the '04 election and 5 what they did in this cycle to better educate the voters 6 and better educate themselves. We have a whole host of 7 activities. 8 And I think that Page 12 is the 9 procedure just updating what was done in '04 in terms of 10 the Division of Elections. 11 And then the following, Page 13, again 12 just updates and includes the results of the required 13 analysis and report of over-votes, under-votes for the 14 2004 election. 15 Open Page 15 is the update on funding 16 for poll worker training, what the legislature has done 17 since the HAVA Committee last met or last revised the 18 plan. 19 MR. YASINSAC: May I ask? At the bottom of 20 Page 14, it appears this is redundant. I was lost when 21 you talked about Get Out The Vote on Page 10. You have 22 this additional paragraph on Page 14 that lists the 23 information on the web page that is also on Page 9, I 24 think. 25 MS. MACMANUS: One of the reasons for that is 41 1 that the questions that are asked by HAVA that are asked 2 in general, the answer is appropriate for more than one 3 section. 4 Page 14, this has to do with the 5 education of election officials, which is also one of 6 the areas covered under HAVA. Thank you for your 7 question. It is confusing. 8 MR. YASINSAC: Thank you. 9 MS. MACMANUS: Any other questions on voter 10 registration -- voter training or voter registration? 11 CHAIRMAN SMITH: I think it's noteworthy that 12 this may be the only time in the history of the federal 13 government that they delivered all the money that they 14 said they would to the states. I think we have $158 15 million. We are still waiting on Everglades money but 16 as far as the election money, we appreciate it. 17 MR. VAUGHAN: Mr. Chairman, I just want to 18 make a general comment on voter education. I know from 19 a small county perspective, Bradford County probably 20 spends more on voter ed now than we spent on the entire 21 election budget 11 years ago, and without the 22 appropriation from the legislature, we would not have 23 been able to do that and that is crucial to the success 24 of our elections, so I thank you for your appropriations 25 and hope they will continue. 42 1 MR. REAGAN: I have a question regarding your 2 review of the plan. Do you find significant 3 differences? 4 MS. MACMANUS: Oh, yes, absolutely. There 5 are very creative things going on. The small counties 6 are just appreciative of being able to -- in general, 7 small counties will use their money for sending out 8 sample ballots, which in my discussions with voter 9 groups, that's something voters really like. You will 10 see them taking it to the voting places as their way of 11 looking at them. I think it's really wonderful for 12 those small counties that otherwise that would eat up 13 their whole budget, as the supervisors pointed out. 14 There are some very creative things. 15 Beginning at the bottom of Page 2, for example, for the 16 sight impaired, some of the supervisors are actually 17 distributing audio sample ballots. I mean, that's very 18 creative and certainly meets one of the important 19 aspects of our law. 20 You can see here the non-partisan voter 21 education. The media advertising has really stepped up 22 a lot and one of the reasons is because a lot of the 23 counties now and local governments have government 24 access television and they're desperate for programming 25 and so the supervisors are being very creative and 43 1 saying, "Hey, here we are. I'll do that." But the 2 innovative programs, wonderfully good use of quickly 3 adopting new web software. 4 This is an aside. This is not an 5 academic perspective here, but I have my students every 6 election cycle and in between analyze various websites 7 across Florida. And with the younger generation -- and 8 I'm talking about under 50 -- are very computer 9 oriented. 10 If you have a boring website, you are 11 going to get no traffic on that website. So I'm 12 impressed with some of the supervisors that have used 13 this money to quickly realize that their website is 14 getting no traffic and boring and not serving the 15 purpose of education and using their money for that. 16 So, yes, I've seen a lot of creativity 17 and I've looked at these plans every year they have been 18 submitted. 19 MR. REAGAN: Thank you. 20 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Thank you very much. 21 Any questions? Is there a motion to 22 approve Element 3? Is there a motion to approve? 23 MR. BROWNING: I so move. 24 MR. MITCHELL: I second. 25 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Motion to approve Element 3 44 1 has been moved and approved. 2 MS. MACMANUS: Thank you for the opportunity 3 to work on this project. It keeps me up-to-date. I 4 appreciate it. 5 CHAIRMAN SMITH: We appreciate it. 6 Tracey, Element 5. 7 MS. LOWE: The next segment has to do with 8 the budgeting. Item 5 is the Election Fund and how 9 Florida will administer the activities and administer 10 the fund. There were no changes to the fund, although 11 there were some concerns that the general report noted. 12 And on Page 2, those concerns are, one, 13 Finding No. 5, salary certifications and personnel 14 activity reports are not always maintained. The 15 Department has provided a form that can be prepared for 16 each employee and these are prepared on a semiannual 17 basis, and the forms were completed to cover the period 18 July '05 through December '05. 19 The second finding had to do with using 20 payment for unused leave for terminated employees, and 21 in response to this inquiry the Department did transfer 22 the leave from HAVA to General Revenue. 23 Additionally, that was made in 24 compliance with the Management Services Rule and they 25 contacted the Election Assistance Committee for guidance 45 1 on disposition on unused leave payments. 2 Funding No. 8 has to do with funding 3 expenditures that were not properly supported. In 4 response to that, the contract manager will review and 5 certify their requests and upon receipt of those 6 requests, Budget and Financial Services will verify the 7 supporting documentation was received. Those are the 8 only changes. 9 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Does the Board have any 10 comments? We have a motion? 11 MR. BROWNING: So moved. 12 MS. PARKS: Second. 13 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Motion to accept Element 5 14 is approved. 15 MS. LOWE: Element 6 is the budget. The 16 first primary change is estimate of cost of the Voter 17 Registration System, and you'll see on Page 2 we have 18 deleted the table that shows estimated costs and 19 replaced it down at the bottom of the page with a table 20 that includes the '06, '07 through fiscal year 2010. 21 In addition, we have added language 22 that shows that for '05, '06, expenditures were 23 10,770,000 and then we discussed the HAVA provisions 24 that have to do with registration. There is an error. 25 The first says there are 38 HAVA funded positions. That 46 1 should be 35. 2 MR. BROWNING: What page are you? 3 MS. LOWE: Two. 4 MS. LOWE: There are 35 positions 5 specifically with the Voter Registration System. 6 And on that second position, there's 7 another error. It should end, there are 18 HAVA funded 8 positions in the Bureau of Voter Registration Services 9 and one in Legal. The other positions are 10 Administrative/Oversight and don't belong to the Voter 11 Registration Services. 12 Then on Page 3 under "Accessible Voting 13 System," the same thing we did with respect to the legal 14 language and stated that the counties were reimbursed 15 for funds or given funds for purchasing accessible 16 voting system. 17 Under "Voter Education," we did the 18 same thing. We used language from another element as to 19 the amount of funds that were given fiscal year for 20 voter education so this language is saying that we 21 covered the elements. 22 Under "Poll Worker Training," again the 23 language from the other sections and the funds that were 24 given, we have added in the second additional or the 25 third paragraph from the bottom language that indicates 47 1 that "As provided for in HAVA, states may use a portion 2 of the requirements payment to carry out other 3 activities," but in order to do that they have to 4 provide to the EAC that the amount expended does not 5 exceed the minimum payment amount, and did notify the 6 EAC of their intention to use some of these funds in 7 March of '06. 8 MS. SNIPES: Isn't it true that we only get 9 three years of HAVA funding? I think we've already 10 gotten three years of HAVA funds. For Voter 11 Registration, isn't that three years? 12 MS. ROBERTS: Not just Voter Registration, 13 Outreach. 14 MS. SNIPES: We're getting another HAVA 15 allocation for this coming year? For the past three 16 years we've gotten an allocation in Broward of 300 and 17 some thousand dollars. 18 MS. ROBERTS: Assuming the legislature makes 19 another appropriation and there's appropriation for '06, 20 '07 and from then on it's every legislation session. 21 MS. SNIPES: Thank you. 22 MS. LOWE: Continuing with Poll Worker 23 Training, at the bottom of Page 4 and top of Page 5, we 24 are again using funding for training. 25 And then "Statewide Poll Worker 48 1 Recruitment Campaign," that covered the previous 2 training so it's that information. 3 MR. POSEY: Can you please speak up a little 4 bit? 5 MS. LOWE: Okay. Under "HAVA Oversight and 6 Reporting," this information is the same. It hasn't 7 changed. We did add the budgeted information for the 8 administrative position covered at the end of this 9 section. 10 On Page 6, the Planning Committee, the 11 only indication here is that the Planning Committee did 12 meet twice in 2006 at the cost of $25,000. 13 Under "Performance Goals and Measures 14 Adoptions," we simply updated that to indicate that they 15 met in 2006, and that the initial Performance Goals -- 16 we did meet on them separately. They were tied into the 17 2004 update. 18 And then under "Election 19 Administration," rather than list specific costs, what 20 we have done is replace it with information that 21 indicates the committee will use HAVA funds as needed 22 for election administration activities and the 23 expenditures may vary from year to year. 24 On Page 7 under, "Complaint 25 Procedures," basically we just kind of tweaked that text 49 1 to indicate that the "to provide a mechanism for 2 reporting potential violations," and "the State Planning 3 Committee recommends continued funding in the amount of 4 $50,000 each year." 5 At the end of the section we showed 6 that the "States may use the requirement payments to 7 carry out other activities," and the "State has provided 8 a certification to the EAC that it implemented the 9 requirements of Title III," and, "In August '06 Florida 10 notified the Title II funds for other activities to 11 improve the administration of elections." 12 The next several pages are charts that 13 indicate the budget figures. We have suggested removing 14 the 03/04 table. The above revenue table is to show the 15 totals that we perceived in HAVA funds. 16 MR. SOLA: What page? 17 MS. LOWE: Page 9 and my numbering got off. 18 We are going to start again with Page 1. One shows 19 appropriations and expenditures through 6-30-05. 20 Page 2 shows 05/06 appropriations and 21 estimated expenditures through 6-06. 22 And Page 3 shows 06/07 budget and 23 proposed budget for the next four years. 24 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Any questions about the 25 budget? 50 1 MR. BROWNING: I move for approval. 2 MS. PARKS: Second. 3 MR. MITCHELL: I probably should have raised 4 this earlier. On Page 3, "Accessible Voting Systems," 5 it seems to me that's worded in such a way that we 6 almost endorse DRE as the only system even though there 7 are other certifying systems. 8 It may be in the future that other 9 systems are approved that allow for disabled access, and 10 it seems to me we should put language in there that 11 recognizes other possible systems as being acceptable, 12 ones approved by our system -- our election 13 certification system. 14 So is it possible to get language there 15 that recognizes the encouragement of other systems like 16 we talked about before, and then in the future, once 17 approved by certification funds, could be proposed for 18 those other systems? 19 MS. LOWE: We can do the language "Florida 20 will encourage vendors to continue to update their 21 system," and "Florida will look at new equipment." 22 MR. MITCHELL: Right, and that language 23 there, it will take away this sort of tacit endorsement 24 of DRE. 25 MR. SOLA: If you just strike the word "DRE" 51 1 all the way to provide "when purchasing an accessible 2 system" or something to that effect. It doesn't have to 3 be DRE. It can be something else. 4 MS. ROBERTS: May I make one comment on 5 that? I think that paragraph -- what we talked about in 6 Pensacola, that everywhere it says "HAVA Planning 7 Committee," because there's been more than one, it's 8 referring to a specific year. After that that paragraph 9 is referring back to the $11.6 million that was 10 disbursed at that time and that was the acceptable 11 equipment. So perhaps by putting the year of that to 12 this committee, without it being discussed, we have 13 clarified that's not necessarily what this committee is 14 discussing. Does that make sense? 15 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Put a historical date on 16 it? 17 MR. POSEY: The date is there. It's the 18 first paragraph. She's saying that retrospective and 19 not prospective. 20 MR. MITCHELL: Is it possible that in 2006 21 the HAVA Planning Committee can recommend, again 22 contingent upon certification approval of systems that 23 are compliant with whatever the system is in the county 24 once approved, language to that effect, that if, in 25 fact, other vendors come in and get systems approved, 52 1 whatever it is? We are not in the business of endorsing 2 any one system as being superior to all others. 3 CHAIRMAN SMITH: At any time you can come in 4 with new technology and have it approved, so that can 5 happen, will happen. 6 MR. BROWNING: This section is purely 7 historical. We're not in the position to make 8 recommendations per se. 9 MS. LOWE: We are in compliance because all 10 counties have it in place. 11 MR. MITCHELL: Are there future dollars 12 available? Is it all historical? 13 MS. LOWE: They have a budget going out four 14 years and there will be funding beyond that, and how 15 it's spent, the Voter Registration is ongoing. 16 MR. MITCHELL: So future dollars are 17 available for these kind of systems? 18 MR. LA BELLE: It depends. 19 MR. BROWNING: The legislature still controls 20 the budget of HAVA process so, again, I think that's 21 more of a legislature issue, whether they're going to 22 appropriate the HAVA funds for development of new 23 technologies or purchase of new technologies. I know 24 exactly where you're going, Reggie, and I disagree with 25 you. 53 1 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Anybody can go into new 2 technology and have it approved so that certainly 3 happened in the last five years and it's certainly going 4 to happen in the future. 5 MR. POSEY: I think we made that clear in the 6 future element already. Again this is just 7 retrospectively. This is how we spent our money. We 8 can't change that now with this section. 9 CHAIRMAN SMITH: We have a motion on Element 10 6 and without objection that is approved. 11 MS. LOWE: The next element is Number 10, 12 Budget Policies and Activities. Most of these changes 13 are updated that we had in local governments. 14 On Page 2 we have updated to indicate 15 that the election activities will continue and we have 16 HAVA funding for that. 17 I'm sorry, on Page 2, the first 18 addition, "HAVA funds were then used to complete the 19 design and implementation of the Florida Voter 20 Registration System, including the creation of 20 full 21 time positions," so what we're suggesting is including 22 the 35 poll worker full-time positions so we're 23 currently funding for the voter registration so that's 24 the correction to this comment. 25 And then again under "administration 54 1 activities" continuing to use HAVA funds as needed and 2 will depend on appropriation. 3 Under "Educating Voters," again this is 4 the same language that just shows the amount of money 5 that's given to counties for voter education. 6 Item D, "Training election officials," 7 again that's the same language that we did with the 8 county. The first addition where it says "HAVA Title II 9 funds," we need to strike that. The legislature does 10 not appropriate Title II so it should begin, "The 11 legislature appropriated $4 million." 12 And then under "Developing the HAVA 13 State Plan," we added the 06/07 showing it was updated 14 this year. 15 And then "Improving, acquiring, 16 leasing, modifying, or replacing voting system," that's 17 the same language the counties were given money for. 18 Then on Page 5, Item G, "Improving 19 polling place accessibility," we have crossed out the 20 old language and added that "today the Department has 21 received four grants and the county and supervisors of 22 election have requested funds from that grant." 23 And then "Establishing toll-free 24 telephone," the Division of Elections has already 25 established this, and there is no plan to use HAVA 55 1 funds. It's a county level practice and the last 2 monitored rule should be stricken because it is done at 3 a county level so the supervisor of the division 4 monitors each county's hot line. 5 CHAIRMAN SMITH: What do you want to strike? 6 MS. LOWE: The last added where it says "No 7 plans to use HAVA funds." 8 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Strike -- 9 MS. LOWE: And "monitored by the Division of 10 Elections." Those last few words and will be the 11 responsibility of each county. 12 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Any questions? Comments? 13 We have a motion on 10? 14 MS. PARKS: So moved. 15 MR. BROWNING: Second. 16 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Element 10 is approved. 17 MS. LOWE: Element 7 is the Maintenance of 18 Efforts, is just asking how the state will maintain its 19 signature state activities using the expenditures for 20 fiscal year ending prior to November 2000. 21 The main change is that the figure is 22 different. It was initially determined to be 23 $3,082,224. When the Auditor General conducted their 24 audit, it was determined to be $3,570,448 or a 25 difference of $7,640. So with that change we've added 56 1 text indicating in 2004/05 we did not meet our required 2 maintenance of effort figure by that shortfall and it is 3 anticipated that in future years when we exceed that 4 amount it will make up for that $7,000. That's the only 5 primary change. 6 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Do we have any questions or 7 comments on Element 7? 8 MS. PARKS: Motion. 9 MR. YASINSAC: Second. 10 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Element 7 is approved. 11 Mr. Rod Petrey. 12 MR. PETREY: Mr. Chairman, I wish I had 13 something really exciting to present to you. 14 CHAIRMAN SMITH: We were going to take a 15 break. 16 MR. PETREY: This may be your break. 17 You are looking at Element No. 9, 18 "Stated-Based Administrative Complaint Procedures." 19 Florida is in compliance. There are no changes. And 20 unless there's some change that I'm not aware of, you 21 have an easy task before you to approve. 22 CHAIRMAN SMITH: So approved. 23 MS. PARKS: Second. 24 CHAIRMAN SMITH: We have an all time record 25 to approve. 57 1 MR. PETREY: Element 13, the "State Plan 2 Development and HAVA Planning Committee." This is a 3 factual update of what has happened to the new members 4 of the task force and the Planning Committee and other 5 events that have happened. If you could at least check 6 your own name spellings and descriptors that will be 7 helpful to us. I notice with Mr. Perez, Holland & 8 Knight needs and ampersand in the middle but, other than 9 that, no change. 10 On Page 3 at the top of the page, about 11 12 lines down, we have stricken through the words "a 12 formal transcript of each meeting also was made" 13 because, as you know, we had problems in Pensacola 14 getting the transcript. We will correct that to show, 15 because we didn't know until right now that we do have a 16 transcript of the Miami meeting, and we have extensive 17 notes of the Pensacola meeting so with your approval, we 18 will make that change. Other than that, Mr. Chairman, I 19 will recommend approval of Element 13. 20 MR. LA BELLE: Sorry for being so self 21 centered here, but my title is actually executive 22 director of Family Network. 23 MR. REAGAN: Rod, one correction. I'm 24 District 67 not 27. 25 MR. PETREY: Oh, I'm sorry. 58 1 MS. PARKS: I don't want to be self-centered 2 either, but perhaps you should identify me as a former 3 county commissioner because that puts in perspective who 4 is paying the bills. 5 MR. PETREY: I will do that. 6 MR. KRACHT: Could we change the name of the 7 American Blind Lawyers Association to the American 8 Association of Visually Impaired Attorneys? 9 MR. PETREY: Association of Visually Impaired 10 Attorneys, got it. 11 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Do we have a motion? 12 Without objection, Element 13 will be approved. 13 MR. POSEY: Mr. Chairman, I'm just wondering 14 if we can show one historic roster just to show that 15 we're not the same people rubber stamping these things. 16 We do that with the budget. We show a budget history, 17 an expenditure history and the people that served 18 before, because it's a pretty diverse group and you keep 19 churning this thing and it should be reflected here. 20 MS. ROBERTS: Especially if we're going to 21 put the year. 22 MR. PRITCHETT: I think what we can do is put 23 each year that the ad hoc committee met with the members 24 for each year. Thank you. 25 We're on Element 11, the "HAVA State 59 1 Plan Management." There were no significant changes. 2 As you can see in the middle of Page 1 we eliminated 3 something that's historical and no longer needed so I 4 move adoption. 5 MS. PARKS: So moved. 6 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Motion to second? 7 MR. YASINSAC: Second. 8 CHAIRMAN SMITH: It's approved. 9 MR. PRITCHETT: We're on the last element, 10 Element 12. We will have to plot along with this and I 11 think we can get through it. 12 What I'm going to try to do on this 13 particular HAVA document is track all the significant 14 changes that were made in the 2006 HAVA plan, so you'll 15 have to indulge me on this page-by-page feat, but I'm 16 only going to highlight things and if there's something 17 on this that you think I need to add, I'll be happy to 18 address that. 19 On Page 1 I updated the dates and 20 locations of where we met. 21 On Page 2, we'll start with Element 1 22 on "Voting Systems," and you can see we just said we 23 added "Certified Voting Systems" reflecting the first 24 element that was discussed in Pensacola, and these 25 Certified Systems Test in September 5th, 2006. 60 1 Element 1, "Provisional Voting," we 2 added the major changes there that we track for 3 provisional voting and struck some of the historical 4 language there. 5 Please, if there's something you think 6 I missed -- 7 CHAIRMAN SMITH: If there's a comment, please 8 speak up. 9 MR. PRITCHETT: Page 3 is a continuation of 10 historical information that's no longer needed. 11 Element 1, Page 3 at the bottom of the 12 page, "Voter Registration System," this is the area 13 again that we had probably the most significant 14 changes. I just highlighted the changes. I think what 15 this is is like brief notes for people that want to go 16 and see what was changed from the previous plans, from 17 this plan to the previous, so that's why I'm making it 18 very succinct. 19 So we've put in the Voter Registration 20 System meets HAVA requirements and we have a new person 21 in charge of that particular service. It goes on Page 4 22 and then we struck all the historical language there. 23 Element 2, "Local Government Payments," 24 we put in the new payments to local governments since 25 2004 that were actually distributed to local 61 1 governments. 2 A couple of typos that I caught that 3 I'm going to address later on. One is a misspelled 4 state and there's an "and" that shouldn't be there. 5 Those track all the changes made and 6 Element 3 on Page 6, "Voter Education." I took all the 7 great work Susan MacManus did and put it in three 8 paragraphs, four paragraphs here, highlighting that we 9 are continuing to innovate to local governments for that 10 purpose and that we were responding to the Auditor 11 General's report. 12 And then we added the Uniform Poll 13 Worker Training Program, and then deleted all the old 14 language that goes to on Page 7. 15 On Page 8, "Voting System Guidelines 16 and Processes," we added the new voting systems 17 guidelines for encapsulating all the successful voting 18 systems that have the audio capability and the success 19 we met with the HAVA requirement and it performed well 20 during the September primary. 21 Element 5, the Election Fund, there 22 were no structural changes to the election fund but I 23 may need your comments. I wonder should I address the 24 findings of the Auditor General in that piece? It 25 didn't really affect the structure of the fund. It's a 62 1 trust fund for HAVA but I didn't really see any reason 2 to put that because there were no historical changes 3 there. We address it in the plan. 4 And Element 6, the HAVA Budget, we 5 itemize what the two biggest expenditures are for the 6 current fiscal year, and that's for the Florida Voter 7 Registration System and Election Administration. Those 8 are the two biggest items. That's around $11 million 9 and we have recommended a budget for the next four years 10 and we put in the budget for the next four years and we 11 just deleted all the old language. It goes to on Page 12 9. 13 On Page 10, "Maintenance Effort," we 14 exceeded the maintenance effort in 2003 but then the 15 Auditor General's report pointed out the shortfall of 16 $7,000 and it's anticipated that we will exceed that in 17 the future so that's in the draft. 18 Element 8, under "Performance 19 Measures," we just went over those this morning and we 20 added performance measures -- well, we said we met the 21 goal for the voters with disabilities, we met the goal 22 for the Voter Registration System and now we're going to 23 try to collect information on why people use provisional 24 ballots in order to reduce that if we can. That would 25 be wonderful. We'd have no provisional ballots. 63 1 Element 9, they were no changes in the 2 Administrative Complaint Process that Mr. Petri just 3 went over. 4 Element 10, Effect of Title 1 Payments. 5 What we've done, we highlighted how those Title 1 6 payments affect those various areas. 7 MR. BROWNING: Mark, you have a typo on 8 Florida. 9 MR. PRITCHETT: I caught that. 10 And they track all the changes that 11 were on Element 10. 12 Under Element 11, "HAVA State Plan 13 Management Section," no changes there. No subsequent 14 changes. 15 Element 12, this is what we're doing 16 right now, Number 12. 17 And then Element 13, we have new 18 committee members listed and we will make those 19 corrections you all gave us. 20 MR. MITCHELL: You need to insert the word 21 "Foundation" after "the American Way." 22 MR. PRITCHETT: Will do. People for the 23 American Way Foundation? 24 MR. MITCHELL: That's correct. 25 MR. PRITCHETT: Mr. Chairman, I move the 64 1 tracking for Element 12, tracking changes for the HAVA 2 state plan and unless there are any additions. 3 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Motion? 4 MR. YASINSAC: One comment. Page 2 and Page 5 8, we mention that we've met the HAVA requirements for 6 successful voting since they performed well and they 7 were successful. 8 I suggest that if we have data that 9 quantifies the level of that success, because of the 10 publicity that evolution achieved, and the notoriety it 11 achieved, it may be beneficial to quantify that success 12 in better terms just in the interest of voter confidence 13 if we have that information available. 14 MS. ROBERTS: Actually at the end -- after 15 this election cycle is complete, you are going to be 16 required to respond to quite a lengthy survey from the 17 Federal Commission which will go into great detail into 18 the success or challenges that Florida faced. 19 In addition, you're required to report 20 to the Florida Legislature what we call over- and 21 under-report which tracks residual votes for all the 22 different voting systems. 23 So I suggest to you that the Division 24 is already responsible for providing a number of reports 25 to both the legislature and the Commission, which I 65 1 believe it addressed that issue that you're looking at. 2 MR. BROWNING: I do believe we're successful 3 but maybe "successfully" is a somewhat subjective term. 4 MR. PRITCHETT: You want me to strike that? 5 MR. BROWNING: Change "successfully" to a 6 word that it worked the way it was intended to work 7 because I believe that it did. That's not to say that 8 there's not room for improvement but then I think, 9 again, we start dovetailing into the EAC survey. When 10 everything is said and done, we may be able to come back 11 the next go-around and make reference to that document. 12 That's just a thought. 13 MR. YASINSAC: In fact, it might be 14 appropriate to place in here that the systems worked as 15 they were designed and a full reporting of their 16 accuracy and their effectiveness will be available 17 through the AFC requirement reporting. 18 MR. PRITCHETT: I can do that. That's good. 19 And I'll refer to the report given to the AFC and the 20 legislature. 21 CHAIRMAN SMITH: With those changes, do we 22 have motion? 23 MS. PARKS: So moved. 24 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Element 12 is approved. 25 MR. PRITCHETT: Mr. Chairman, I have some 66 1 planning. 2 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Yes, hand out the calendar. 3 We're going to outline how we're going 4 to do this report. 5 MR. PRITCHETT: First of all, a couple of 6 general comments, Mr. Chairman. 7 For some of the new members, the 8 Collins Center has been involved in this since 2000 when 9 Governor Bush asked us to look at the 2000 election and 10 make recommendations to the legislature in terms of what 11 we can do to fix the procedures and the standards, 12 technology for the voting system so we felt very 13 fortunate to be involved in this. 14 And one of our charge is the contract 15 for helping you write the HAVA Plan, to look at the 16 other states and what those states do, and there is no 17 other state that documents the statutory framework, the 18 procedures like Florida does. 19 Florida has the most detailed Help 20 America Vote Plan in the country so that's another thing 21 that you can feel some satisfaction with is that, you 22 know, this thing is very well documented. 23 A lot of states haven't even dealt with 24 some of these issues. There are lawsuits and things 25 going on so that's a success story for Florida. 67 1 In the future, now that we have the 2 statutory framework and the procedures laid out, the 3 future HAVA State Planning Committee will probably want 4 to dig a little deeper and look into how some of these 5 processes are being implemented at the local level and 6 the state level, so I think in the future any updates to 7 the HAVA Plan will look a little different than what the 8 past versions have been, and I think that's what the 9 federal government was anticipating once we got through 10 and met all these deadlines up to 2006 so that's just a 11 little idea in the future and how you may want to look 12 at this in the future. 13 For the immediate future, I passed out 14 a calendar for you and this is what we were proposing to 15 do. We are proposing to get a draft review with our 16 strike-outs and red markings by next Wednesday of the 17 entire plan. And I apologize for all the strike-outs 18 but that's the best way to document for transparency 19 what we've done. 20 So we'll get that to you on Wednesday 21 by e-mail or by FedEx. If you could turn that around 22 for us, we are going to give you the weekend. We like 23 to get things done. We're on a tight timeline so we 24 appreciate your comments by the 23rd, which is Monday 25 the 23rd, then that gives us about three to four days to 68 1 take your comments or anything that you have and then 2 we'll massage it and submit a draft a week later to the 3 Department of State. 4 MR. BROWNING: Do we officially adopt a plan 5 or submit it to the secretary? 6 MR. PRITCHETT: We're going to give you a 7 draft form. We have a copy of it. We're going to give 8 you a copy of the draft form and you have three options 9 on the draft form: You can accept it as is; accept it 10 with modification; or say "We need a conference call 11 because I see something that I didn't anticipate" and 12 then we'll put together the conference call. So this 13 expedites the process quite a bit for everybody. 14 MR. KRACHT: When do you need the form by? 15 MR. PRITCHETT: Monday the 26th so about 11 16 days. But you have four days to really turn it around 17 to us but I think you've kept up with the changes pretty 18 well. 19 Mr. Chairman, is that acceptable? 20 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Absolutely. I think that's 21 a good plan. I'm certain this group is going to be very 22 thorough the way we've worked in Pensacola and here. I 23 don't think we'll have a major problem. 24 MR. PRITCHETT: The Division of Elections 25 would also like your permission in a formal motion for 69 1 making the technical changes, slight modifications that 2 we see that we didn't anticipate to the document and we 3 will make sure they're highlighted in the copies you 4 make on Wednesday the 18th. 5 Dawn, does that make sense? 6 MS. ROBERTS: That's correct. 7 MR. PRITCHETT: So we need a formal. 8 MR. BROWNING: I move to give Collins Center 9 the ability to make technical changes. 10 MR. PRITCHETT: And the additions. 11 MR. BROWNING: And the additions. 12 MR. YASINSAC: Second. 13 CHAIRMAN SMITH: It's approved without 14 objection. 15 That brings us to the time for public 16 testimony. Let's see, who's going to give public 17 testimony? Let me say -- I made this comment earlier -- 18 this committee has a very narrow responsibility and 19 that is to make sure we are in compliance with the Help 20 America Vote Act and that's what we did in our meeting 21 at Pensacola. We put this report together to make sure 22 we are in compliance. We are not really an election 23 reform commission or anything like that to make 24 recommendations to the legislature or any other group. 25 We certainly want to hear from you. We 70 1 ask you to be as brief as you can be and with that. 2 Mark? 3 MR. PRITCHETT: What we're doing is they're 4 filling out the forms and we will give you the forms and 5 you can call on them. 6 At this point and time Dawn Roberts, 7 the Division Director of the Elections, has data on the 8 provisional ballots. 9 MS. ROBERTS: Mr. Chairman -- 10 MS. PARKS: If we can have a time or two for 11 questions or comments. 12 CHAIRMAN SMITH: I thought we were finished. 13 MS. ROBERTS: Thank you. Dawn Roberts. 14 You had asked for data for 2004 with 15 respect to provisional ballots. We do have a copy of 16 the Election Day Survey that we submitted to the 17 Elections Assistance Commission. 18 Question 9C of that survey was, 19 "Identify the five most common reasons that provisional 20 ballots were rejected." 21 And how we went about completing the 22 surveys that we in turn passed along to the panel and 23 asked surveys from the 57 supervisors of elections so we 24 could compile the data and the results were as follows: 25 Reason No. 1. Not registered. 71 1 Reason No. 2. Voter in the wrong 2 precinct. 3 Reason No. 3. Registered late after 4 book closing. 5 Reason No. 4. Signatures did not 6 match. 7 Reason No. 5. Felon rights has not 8 been restored. 9 Now, we have got aggregate numbers by 10 county as to the number of provisional ballots cast and 11 then subsequently counted. What we do not have, because 12 we did not request that information at the time, was the 13 information that you all now are recommending that we 14 get, and that is why that provisional ballot was issued, 15 broken down into that level of detail per county. 16 Now, that information is available 17 because you have the certificates that have to be filled 18 out at polling places advising the voter why they are 19 given a provisional ballot, but we did not collect that 20 data at that level in 2004. So again that will be 21 something that should -- should this recommendation be 22 approved, will be in effect for 2008. 23 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Any questions? 24 MR. MITCHELL: If we can get a copy of that 25 survey. 72 1 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Our first speaker will be 2 Juanda Ferguson. 3 MS. FERGUSON: Good morning. My question was 4 or is we'll have to address our precinct level issues. 5 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Will you be more specific? 6 MS. FERGUSON: Is it going to -- like find 7 out if there are any problems at the precinct level? 8 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Anybody from the Department 9 of State want to comment? 10 MS. ROBERTS: Well, I'm not quite clear -- as 11 far as the federal Help America Vote Act, what this plan 12 does is it addresses those 13 elements that are in the 13 federal law, and I'm not sure if you're looking -- I'm 14 not sure what you're looking for as far as the precinct 15 level, but the 13 elements, I'm not sure it's going to 16 necessarily address what I think you're commenting on. 17 MS. FERGUSON: More specifically if voting 18 has been accurately counted and that kind of thing. 19 MS. ROBERTS: Well, there is language in HAVA 20 talking about Voting Systems and Standards and it's the 21 Department's position that we're in full compliance with 22 that. 23 As indicated by our Over- and 24 Under-Report that we're required to submit to the 25 legislature after every general election, in fact, the 73 1 rate, as indicated in the report, has gone from I 2 believe it was over two percent in 2000 and it's now .14 3 percent of all votes cast, which is an amazing drop, so, 4 yes, we have made vast improvements. 5 MS. FERGUSON: Thank you. 6 CHAIRMAN SMITH: Thank you very much. 7 Alvaro Fernandez. 8 MR. FERNANDEZ: I'd like to put these letters 9 into the record. 10 Good morning, my name is Alvaro 11 Fernandez and I'm here representing Advancement 12 Project. Thank you very much for this opportunity. 13 I'm here to talk about the Florida 14 statute and policies that require all new voter 15 registrant's identifying numbers to successfully match 16 with the corresponding state database prior to that 17 applicant becoming a registered voter. 18 This statute burdens eligible voters 19 and violates federal law. Matching an applicant 20 registration number with information in a database is an 21 error prone and unreliable process. Both human and 22 computer errors are indelible inputting, maintaining, 23 transferring and matching of data. 24 For example, a study done by ABT 25 Associates determined that in the Florida Social