[Federal Register: September 18, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 182)]
[Notices]
[Page 54141-54154]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr18se08-46]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION
Publication of State Plan Pursuant to the Help America Vote Act
AGENCY: U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC).
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to sections 254(a)(11)(A) and 255(b) of the Help
America Vote Act (HAVA), Public Law 107-252, the U.S. Election
Assistance Commission (EAC) hereby causes to be published in the
Federal Register changes to the HAVA State plan previously submitted by
Georgia.
DATES: This notice is effective upon publication in the Federal
Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bryan Whitener, Telephone 202-566-3100
or 1-866-747-1471 (toll-free).
Submit Comments: Any comments regarding the plans published
herewith should be made in writing to the chief election official of
the individual State at the address listed below.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 24, 2004, the U.S. Election
Assistance Commission published in the Federal Register the original
HAVA State plans filed by the fifty States, the District of Columbia
and the Territories of American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S.
Virgin Islands. 69 FR 14002. HAVA anticipated that States, Territories
and the District of Columbia would change or update their plans from
time to time pursuant to HAVA section 254(a)(11) through (13). HAVA
sections 254(a)(11)(A) and 255 require EAC to publish such updates.
This is Georgia's first revision to its State plan.
The revised State plan from Georgia addresses changes in the budget
of the previously submitted State plan and accounts for the use of
Fiscal Year 2008 requirements payments. The State has changed the focus
of its plan from the initial deployment of voting system components and
the related education of the public and local election officials to the
continued maintenance of Georgia's voting system and the replacement of
the State's voter registration database. In accordance with HAVA
section 254(a)(12), the State plan submitted for publication provides
information on how the State succeeded in carrying out its previous
State plan. The State confirms that these changes to its State plan
were developed and
[[Page 54142]]
submitted for public comment in accordance with HAVA sections
254(a)(11), 255, and 256.
Upon the expiration of thirty days from September 18, 2008, the
State is eligible to implement the changes addressed in the plan that
is published herein, in accordance with HAVA section 254(a)(11)(C).
EAC wishes to acknowledge the effort that went into revising this
State plan and encourages further public comment, in writing, to the
State election official listed below.
Chief State Election Official
The Honorable Karen C. Handel, Secretary of State, 2 Martin Luther
King Jr. Drive SE., Suite 1104 West Tower, Atlanta, Georgia 30334,
Phone: (404) 657-5380, Fax: (404) 657-5371. Thank you for your interest
in improving the voting process in America.
Dated: September 12, 2008.
Thomas R. Wilkey,
Executive Director, U.S. Election Assistance Commission.
2008 STATE PLAN, AMENDED
Help America Vote Act of 2002
State of Georgia
Plan amended and submitted by Karen Handel, Secretary of State,
August 6, 2008.
As required by Public Law 107-252, Help America Vote Act 2002,
Section 253(b).
Table of Contents
Preamble
PART ONE
Chapter 1--Historical Election Challenges
Chapter 2--Election Reform (2001 and 2002)
2.1 Direction in Code and Rule
2.2 The 21st Century Voting Commission
2.3 Pilot Project
2.4 System Selection
2.5 System Deployment
Chapter 3--2003 HAVA Status and Steps for Completing Compliance
3.1 2003 Compliance Status
3.2 2003 Legislative Steps for Completing Compliance
3.3 2003 Administrative Actions and Certifications
PART TWO
Chapter 4--Change and Implementation Summary
4.1 Overview of Changes to the 2003 State Plan
4.2 Successful Implementation of the 2003 State Plan
Chapter 5--2008 HAVA State Plan, Amended Implementation
5.1 Use of Requirements Payments
5.2 Distribution and Monitoring
5.3 Voter Education and Training
5.4 Voting System Standards
5.5 Election Fund Established
5.6 Proposed Budget
5.7 Maintenance of Effort
5.8 Performance Goals and Measures
5.9 Administrative Complaint Procedures
5.10 Effect of Title I Payments
5.11 Management of the Plan
5.12 Previous State Plan Implementation and Changes
5.13 State Plan Committee
Appendix 1--2003 Status & Implementation
Preamble
This document is Georgia's current plan for continuing
implementation of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). The 2008 HAVA State
Plan, Amended presents Georgia's historic election reform process that
supported the creation of the 2003 HAVA State Plan, a summary of how
the 2003 plan was implemented, and plans for upcoming years.
Part One of this plan memorializes important historical context
preceding the 2003 Georgia State Plan. Georgia is justifiably proud of
having initiated important election reforms in anticipation of HAVA.
Many of HAVA's requirements had already been implemented in Georgia by
the November 2002 general election. Hence, Georgia's 2003 HAVA State
Plan reflected a starting place that was significantly further ahead of
most other states at that time.
Part Two of the 2008 HAVA State Plan, Amended describes how Georgia
has implemented its previous state plan (Chapter 4) and presents its
plans for upcoming years (Chapter 5). While fully compliant with HAVA,
Georgia is committed to on-going improvements. In that spirit, the 2008
HAVA State Plan, Amended focuses on: (1) Replacing Georgia's 1993
computer system supporting voter registration and elections management;
(2) replacing components to preserve the reliable, accurate performance
of Georgia's statewide uniform electronic voting system; and (3)
continuing other successful initiatives that have proven valuable
during the past 7 years.
Activity under the 2003 State Plan had $77,304,946 in Federal funds
available, plus State funds in excess of the required 5 percent match.
Funds available for activity in the 2008 State Plan, Amended total
$4,971,521 as shown in Table 1.
Table 1--Available Funding for 2008 HAVA State Plan, Amended
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal funds State match Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remaining Title I Funds................. $1,137,260 (already spent)................. $1,137,260
Remaining Title II Funds................ 497,587 (already spent)................. 497,587
2008 Funds Title II..................... 3,169,840 $166,834........................ 3,336,674
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Funds Available................... ................. ................................ 4,971,521
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part One
Chapter 1--Historical Election Challenges
America's elections were primarily conducted by county and
municipal governments through the year 2000. In Georgia, each county
was responsible for the selection and purchase of the county voting
system. The local election superintendent was responsible for the
maintenance and testing of the voting systems as well as for the layout
and printing of election ballots pursuant to state law.
In the November 2000 General Election, 93,991 ballots in the State
of Georgia did not register a vote in the Presidential race, because:
(1) The voter accidentally marked more than one vote for the office;
(2) the voter attempted to make a choice, but did not mark the ballot
correctly; (3) the voting device failed to count the vote cast; or (4)
the voter chose not to vote for the President.
To evaluate the conduct of elections in Georgia during the weeks
following the November 2000 General Election, the Secretary of State
compiled and analyzed information from citizen complaints, minutes of
public hearings conducted by the NAACP, concerns submitted by the
League of Women Voters, and dozens of interviews of local election
superintendents, voter registrars, and political party leaders. As a
result of this analysis, the following issues were identified as
affecting Georgia's elections:
1. Outdated voting equipment;
2. Ballot problems;
3. Lines too long & other polling place deficiencies;
4. Shortage of trained poll workers;
[[Page 54143]]
5. Election law violations;
6. Slow processing of Absentee Ballots;
7. Growth of ``language minorities'';
8. State mainframe computer system unreliable;
9. Counties slow to report election results; and
10. Voter registration process costly and slow.
The Secretary of State also noted that the state was using four
different types of voting systems, that no uniformity existed among the
counties for counting votes, and that each system experienced a
significant amount of under-votes. An analysis was then conducted of
the under-votes that occurred on each type of voting system on a
county-by county basis. In the 2000 General Election, the average
percentage of under-votes for each system used in the State for all
counties was 3.6%.
A summary of results is shown in Table 2 below.
Table 2--Voting Equipment Performance
[2000 general election]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introduced in Counties Under vote Votes not
Voting system Year invented Georgia using system percentage counted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paper ballot.................... 1889 1900 2 3.3 113
Punch card...................... 1890 1964 17 4.6 38,065
Lever machine................... 1892 1950 73 4.2 16,926
Optical-scan.................... 1980 1986 67 .............. ..............
--Central count............. .............. .............. .............. 4.2 21,999
--Precinct count............ .............. .............. .............. 4.7 16,196
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A report compiling the results of the study was prepared and
presented to the Governor and the Members of the General Assembly with
the following recommendations:
1. Adopt a Statewide Uniform Electronic Voting Initiative--
Authorize, fund, and deploy a Statewide Uniform Electronic Voting
Initiative (SUEVI) to create a single uniform method of voting
consistent in every county in the state;
2. Implement Early Voting--Enhance polling place convenience and
reduce Election Day waiting;
3. Overhaul the Voter Registration System--Upgrade the state's
voter registration database from the slow, unreliable, inflexible, and
expensive mainframe system to a flexible state-of-the-art server-based
system;
4. Pursue Poll Worker & Poll Location Alternatives--Seek new
alternatives to assist counties in securing new poll locations and
recruiting and training poll workers, both of which are in short
supply;
5. Streamline Polling Place Procedures--Reduce or eliminate
burdensome paperwork and procedures at the polls and move voters more
quickly through the voting process;
6. Consolidate Authority to Remove Deceased Voters from Voter
List--Authorize the Secretary of State to remove deceased voters from
the voter rolls to assure a more accurate voter list, (responsibility
that previously rested solely with the counties); and
7. Modernize Voter Information Resources--Use new centralized
technology solutions to offer citizens quicker, easier means to locate
their precinct and verify their voter registration.
The Secretary's report to the Governor and the Members of the
General Assembly recommended that the State adopt a single uniform
voting platform. Importantly, it also initiated a shift in policy--
transferring a portion of election responsibilities from the counties
and election superintendents to the State for funding and deployment of
a new statewide election system.
Chapter 2--Election Reform (2001-2002)
2.1 Direction in Code and Rule
Recognizing the need to address concerns with the elections
process, the General Assembly enacted bipartisan legislation, Senate
Bill 213, (hereinafter ``SB 213'') which the Governor signed into law
on April 18, 2001. Official Code of Georgia Code Annotated Sec. 21-2-
300 (hereinafter O.C.G.A. Sec. 21-2-300). This legislation established
the policy and the statutory framework for Georgia to begin identifying
and deploying essential changes to its election system.
Chief among the changes to the election system was the policy
directive that the Secretary of State would purchase and deploy a
uniform voting system for casting and counting votes in all county,
state and federal elections by the July 2004 General Primary. The
Secretary of State was authorized to deploy to the counties a voting
system that met requirements established by the Secretary of State.
O.C.G.A. Sec. 21-2-300 (a). On August 30, 2002, the State Election
Board advanced the implementation date to the November 2002 General
Election with Rule 183-1-12-.01. With adoption of this directive,
Georgia became the first state in the nation to set a deadline for the
implementation of a modern uniform statewide voting system.
O.C.G.A. Sec. 21-2-300 also authorized the Secretary of State to
conduct a pilot project to test and evaluate the use of electronic
voting systems during the 2001 municipal elections. It created the 21st
Century Voting Commission (hereinafter ``Voting Commission'') to
oversee the pilot project. The statute further authorized the Voting
Commission to make recommendations to the General Assembly and the
Secretary of State.
2.2 The 21st Century Voting Commission
The purpose of the Voting Commission was to:
1. Oversee the electronic voting pilot project,
2. Test direct recording electronic (DRE) voting equipment,
3. Advise the Secretary of State on the choice of voting equipment
to be used statewide in all counties pursuant to O.C.G.A. Sec. 21-2-
300, and
4. Report findings to the Governor and the General Assembly by
December 31, 2001.
The Voting Commission included four Democrats, four Republicans,
eight Non-Partisan members, one Independent, and one member of the
Libertarian Party of Georgia, six local county election officials, the
Director of the State Elections Division, as well as five members of
the Georgia General Assembly (three from the House and two from the
Senate). The Voting Commission also accepted input from various public
interest groups representing minorities, disabled voters and multi-
lingual groups.
As its first priority, the Voting Commission investigated voting
systems and established standards that a voting system would have to
meet in order to
[[Page 54144]]
be considered for the pilot project and use in the State of Georgia.
The standards included:
1. A convenient and intuitive voter interface;
2. Features that prohibit duplicate, or over-votes;
3. Opportunity to correct under-vote or over-votes on ballot;
4. Strong security components to assure that votes cannot be lost
or cast without authorization;
5. The capability to print, if required, a written record of each
ballot cast;
6. The flexibility to store and present thousands of different
ballot variations or ``styles'';
7. The capability to be fully accessible to blind voters and those
with other disabilities and allow disabled voters to cast their ballot
independently and without assistance;
8. The ability to compute final results and generate a variety of
election reports very quickly; and
9. A turnkey system that would allow each county to conduct any
election from start to finish without any assistance from the Vendor.
2.3 Pilot Project
Upon establishing the system standards of the voting platform, the
Voting Commission prepared for the November 2001 Pilot Project. In
response to a request-for-proposals (RFP) commissioned by the Voting
Commission, seven DRE system vendors petitioned to participate in the
November 2001 Pilot Project. At a June meeting of the Voting Commission
in Atlanta, all seven vendors demonstrated their systems and presented
their experience and track record in the industry. The Voting
Commission recommended that all seven vendors be allowed to participate
in the project, provided that each vendor obtained the necessary
national and state certifications in time to adequately prepare for the
November 2001 Election.
The Secretary of State entered into contracts with six certified
vendors to conduct the Pilot Project. Using a lease agreement, the
vendors agreed to provide voting systems for the Pilot Project at a
special rate of $600 per voting unit. The contracts required that
vendors transport the units to and from the cities, provide training
for both election superintendents and poll workers, assist with voter
education efforts via public demonstrations, and have staff present in
precincts to provide Election Day support.
The Voting Commission held five public hearings and additional sub-
committee work sessions across the State of Georgia. In these hearings,
the Voting Commission reviewed data on voting error rates, heard
presentations from manufacturers of electronic voting equipment and
testimony from election officials from Georgia and other states,
considered comments from interest groups, stakeholders, and the general
public on voting issues, and reviewed the election results from the
Pilot Project. Several Voting Commission delegations also traveled to
other states to personally observe elections in which DRE voting
equipment was used.
Based on information obtained from the extensive analysis and
review of data, public testimony, and observations obtained from the
Pilot Project, the Voting Commission made the following system
recommendations to the Governor and members of the General Assembly:
1. Georgia's uniform election platform should be a DRE voting
system used for Election Day in-precinct voting, for in-person absentee
voting, and, if authorized by new legislation, for in-person
``advance'' or ``early'' voting. The DRE system selected should have
the capability to prevent duplicate, or over-votes, provide voters with
a ``summary screen'' to warn voters of potential under-votes or
selection errors, and include a process for voters to correct errors or
omissions before a final vote is cast. The system should include on-
board battery back-up in case of power failure, have the capability to
produce an independent and paper audit trail of every ballot cast and
should permit a visually impaired voter, and others with disabilities,
to cast a ballot independently and without assistance.
2. For absentee voting by mail, the uniform system should include
an optical scan component. The optical scan component should integrate
seamlessly with the DRE components of the system for ballot preparation
and tabulation.
3. The uniform election system should be controlled by an Election
Management System or software program that will allow election
officials to easily design both DRE and optical scan ballot formats
simultaneously, that will integrate all results into a single vote
tallying report and that will easily interface with existing and future
voter registration systems.
4. The state should seek to maximize the benefits of statewide
negotiating and purchasing capacity by securing a statewide software
license, as well as favorable pricing for technical support,
maintenance and additional or replacement equipment that is made
available for the benefit of local governments.
The Voting Commission unanimously adopted these recommendations and
submitted them to the Governor and members of the General Assembly in
December 2001.
2.4 System Selection
Based upon the success of the Pilot Project and the recommendation
from the Voting Commission, the Governor authorized and the General
Assembly approved a Statewide Uniform Electronic Voting Initiative Fund
(SUEVI) and authorized $54 million in bond funds for the purchase of a
statewide uniform electronic voting system. An additional $3.8 million
was authorized to establish the voter education fund and $500,000 for
the creation of an Election Center for election official training and
support at the Kennesaw State University Center for Election Systems
(hereinafter ``KSU Center for Election Systems'').
Upon establishment of the election fund, the Secretary of State and
the Georgia Technology Authority (hereinafter ``GTA'') initiated an RFP
process in January 2002 and began evaluating proposals from vendors
capable of supplying a Direct Recording Electronic Voting System on a
statewide basis for 2,926 precincts in 159 counties. The RFP required
each vendor to submit a proposal that included: Voting system
specifications, pricing plans, deployment plan and schedule, training
plan and schedule for hardware and software training, short term and
long term service plans, and a proposal for voter education efforts.
In response to the RFP, nine vendors submitted bids for the
deployment of a statewide voting system. An intensive proposal and
demonstration process then began with the assistance of the Georgia
Technology Authority. Through an extensive evaluation process conducted
by GTA and the evaluation committee, Diebold Election Systems, Inc.
(hereinafter ``Diebold'') was selected as the state's vendor for
election equipment.
The State of Georgia entered into a contract with Diebold on May 3,
2002, wherein the State of Georgia and Diebold agreed to deploy a
uniform voting system in every county within a 6-month implementation
period (186 days prior to the November 5, 2002 election).
2.5 System Deployment
The deployment plan Diebold provided in response to the State's RFP
included the following phases: System testing, system development,
system training and voter education.
[[Page 54145]]
2.5.1 System Testing
System testing involved 19,015 DRE voting stations, 400 absentee
ballot systems and 161 voting system servers to be tested a minimum of
4 times including at the:
1. Manufacturer's warehouse;
2. Central processing warehouse;
3. County acceptance testing location by KSU; and
4. Logic and Accuracy testing conducted by Diebold and County
election staff days before the November election.
2.5.2 System Deployment
Secretary of State created a formula based on one DRE unit per 200
active registered voters in each county to determine the number of DRE
units each county would receive. Before delivery, intergovernmental
agreements were created between the State and each county which
included terms for the storage, protection and use of the voting
system. To facilitate deliveries and support, counties were grouped
into 12 delivery regions. Dates were then established for delivery of
components of the voting system to the Counties. Site surveys were
conducted of polling places for assurances of adequate electrical
supply, structural support of the building and security of the building
for protection of the voting system.
2.5.3 System Training
Extensive training and support of local election officials was an
important factor in the successful initial deployment of equipment, as
well as of its subsequent use. Election official training on the
operation of the voting system officials was provided by Diebold. On-
site county training at the request of the county was provided on
behalf of the Secretary of State's office by the KSU Center for
Election Systems. Additional regional ``refresher'' sessions were
conducted by the Secretary of State's State Elections Division.
Preparations included poll worker training (at least 2 trained per
precinct for all 2,926 precincts) provided at each county by Diebold.
Further training was conducted by KSU Center for Election Systems and
Diebold upon the request of individual county election officials.
2.5.4 Voter Education
The Secretary of State's Office conducted direct voter education
and supported outreach conducted by county election officials. A poll
worker training video was created and used statewide to ensure uniform
use of the equipment in polls on Election Day. A voter education video
and a 30-second public service announcement entitled ``Touch the
Future'' was developed and distributed for use statewide. State,
regional and county level ``Voter Education Coordinators'' were
deployed by the Secretary of State's Office to conduct hands-on DRE
demonstrations in every county. Printed materials were distributed
through U.S. mail and selected community groups. Comprehensive voter
education Web site with interactive equipment demonstration was
established and DRE unit demonstrations were conducted in a variety of
settings including public meetings, school assemblies, and community
festivals.
2.5.5 Deployment Outcome
There were significant improvements in the conduct of the November
2002 General Election in Georgia. The under-vote rate for the 2002 U.S.
Senate Election was a historically low 0.86% (a dramatic reduction,
compared to the 2000 Presidential Election under-vote rate of 3.5% and
the 1998 U.S. Senate Election under-vote rate of 4.8%). Emphasis on
election official training, voter education coordination at the
regional and local level, and enthusiastic participation by state and
county election officials, poll workers, and voters contributed to this
success.
Chapter 3--2003 HAVA Status and Steps for Completing Compliance
3.1 2003 HAVA Status
Georgia's successful use of its uniform statewide electronic voting
system in the November 2002 General Election put it substantially in
compliance with Help America Vote Act requirements. Steps already taken
in anticipation of HAVA legislation are shown in Appendix 1--2003
Compliance Status. Remaining steps which were still pending completion
in December, 2003 are also identified in Appendix 1.
3.2 2003 Legislative Steps for Completing Compliance
To complete compliance with HAVA requirements the Georgia General
Assembly provided certain authorizations which could be included in the
HAVA 2003 State Plan. This was accomplished with passage of Senate Bill
258 (hereinafter ``SB 258''), which was signed by the Governor on June
2, 2003. Upon approval of SB 258 by the United States Department of
Justice, the State of Georgia had the statutory framework in place to
implement all necessary procedures to bring Georgia into full
compliance with the Help America Vote Act.
SB 258 revised the following six areas of the Election Code:
1. Definition of a vote--The Election Code previously provided the
definition of a vote for each election system used in the State of
Georgia for federal, state and local elections. SB 258 authorized the
State Election Board (SEB) to promulgate rules (SEB Rule 183-1-15-.02)
to consolidate and define a vote as required by HAVA and the
establishment of a Vote Review Panel to review ballots rejected by
optical scan tabulators (see O.C.G.A. Sec. 21-2-483(g)(2)(B)).
2. Military and Overseas Ballots--SB 258 amended the Election Code
to give responsibility for military and overseas civilian absentee
voting procedures to the Secretary of State's Office. SB 258 also
provided that applications for absentee ballots for military and
overseas voters shall be valid for two election cycles as required for
those voting under the Uniformed and Overseas Civilians Absentee Voting
Act (UOCAVA). It also authorized the Secretary of State to adopt a new
ballot oath created by the Federal Voting Assistance Program (FVAP).
3. Registration of first-time voters by mail--SB 258 amended the
Election Code to provide that citizens who register for the first time
by U.S. Mail are required to include with that registration application
one of the forms of identification specified in HAVA. Those who
register by mail and do not include such documentation will be required
to present identification at the polling place. Persons who are
entitled to vote other than in person under federal law, including
UOCAVA, are exempt from this provision. (HAVA Section 303(b)(3) and
O.C.G.A. Sec. 21-2-220(c)(2)).
4. Provisional Ballots--SB 258 amended the Election Code to provide
that ballots cast during an election with federal candidates on the
ballot at a polling place during court-ordered extended polling hours
shall be treated as provisional ballots. It also required county
election officials to provide notification to the voter regarding how
to obtain information on whether the provisional ballot was counted and
also requires county registrars to create a free access system that
allows the voter to determine whether the provisional ballot was
counted or not.
5. ``Overvote'' Instructions--Georgia's DRE voting system precludes
a voter from casting too many votes for an office (an ``overvote'') at
the polling place. SB 258 amended the Election Code to provide that the
absentee ballot instructions for optical scan mail in ballots include
information about overvotes and explain how to avoid them. SB 258 also
required that optical
[[Page 54146]]
scan tabulators be programmed to return (reject) ballots containing
overvotes or improper marks.
6. State Administrative Complaint Procedures--SB 258 amended the
Election Code to authorize the Secretary of State (as the designated
Chief Election Official) to establish and administer an administrative
complaint procedure for processing complaints related to HAVA Title
III. (see Secretary of State Rule 590-8-1-.01)
3.3 2003 Administrative Actions and Certifications
Georgia's 2003 HAVA State Plan provided in Chapter IV reflects that
Georgia had taken steps to meet and implement the following:
1. Early Money Out Certification, HAVA Section 101(a): The 2003
State Plan indicated that Georgia had certified and indicated
participation for receipt of Title I payments through the GSA Web site.
Funds were subsequently received.
2. Accessibility of polling places for disabled voters, HAVA
Section 101(b)(1)(G): The 2003 State Plan indicated Georgia's intent to
survey and supervise the improvement of accessibility and quality of
polling places providing physical access for individuals with
disabilities. A statewide survey was subsequently made and used as the
basis to implement a state-administered grant program for polling place
accessibility improvements.
3. Toll-free Access System, HAVA Section 101(b)(1)(H): The 2003
State Plan indicated Georgia's intent to study and evaluate a toll-free
hotline that voters may use to:
a. Report possible voting fraud and voting rights violations,
b. Obtain general election information, and
c. Access detailed automated information on their voter
registration status, specific polling place locations, and other
relevant information.
Georgia subsequently implemented a toll-free hot line.
4. Certify Replacement of Punch Card or Lever Voting Machines, HAVA
Section 102: The 2003 State Plan indicted that Georgia had certified
that it had replaced punch card and lever voting systems and intended
to use Section 102 funding to reimburse the State treasury as HAVA
allowed. Reimbursements were subsequently made.
5. Membership of Standards Board, HAVA Section 213: Two
representatives to the Standard's Board were appointed as required. New
appointments have been made as necessary.
6. Certification of Use of Title II Requirements Payments, HAVA
Section 253: The 2003 State Plan indicated Georgia's intent to certify
that it would use Requirements payments in the manner required.
Certification was provided and funds were subsequently received.
7. Administrative Complaint Procedure, HAVA Section 402: The 2003
State Plan indicated Georgia's intent to implement rules to administer
the Administrative Complaint Procedure pursuant to authority granted in
SB 258 to the Secretary of State. Rule 590-8-1-.1 ``Administrative
Complaint Procedure for Violations of Title III of the Help America
Vote Act of 2002'' was adopted on May 11, 2004 and published by the EAC
in the Federal Register, Vol. 70, No.169, Thursday, September 1, 2005
on page 52183.
8. Military and Overseas Voting Information Office, HAVA Sections
702 and 703: The Secretary of State pursuant to SB 258 became the
Designated Military and Overseas Voting Information Office and assumed
related responsibilities for reporting to the Election Assistance
Commission.
9. State Plan Submitted, HAVA Section 254: The 2003 State Plan
indicated that it was meeting the requirements of HAVA Section 254. The
2003 State Plan was submitted on December 10, 2003. It was published by
the EAC in the Federal Register, Vol. 69, No. 57, Wednesday, March 24,
2004 on pages 14247 to 14263.
Part Two
Chapter 4--Change and Implementation Summary
This chapter describes how the 2008 amendments change Georgia's
HAVA State Plan and report on how Georgia succeeded in carrying out the
previous state plan (in fulfillment of the Help America vote Act of
2002, Section 254(a)(12)). The 2008 amendments to the State Plan were
developed in accordance with HAVA Section 255 and the requirements for
public notice and comment prescribed in Section 256 of HAVA.
4.1 Overview of Changes to the 2003 State Plan
Part One of Georgia's 2008 HAVA State Plan, Amended presents the
historic election reform process that preceded and supported the
creation of the 2003 HAVA State Plan. Part One is comprised of: Chapter
1, Historical Election Challenges; Chapter 2, Election Reform (2001 and
2002); and Chapter 3, 2003 HAVA Status and Steps for Completing
Compliance. These three chapters contain the background information
previously contained in Chapters I through IV of the 2003 HAVA State
Plan.
Part Two of Georgia's 2008 HAVA State Plan, Amended, is comprised
of Chapters 4 and 5 which update the previous plan from 2003. Chapter 4
presents the required summary of changes and reports on how the 2003
plan was carried out. This chapter is completely new material because
there have been no amendments to the Georgia HAVA State Plan prior to
2008.
Chapter 5, Implementation of the 2008 HAVA State Plan, Amended
presents plans for future activity. It has 13 sections, one for each
part of HAVA, Section 254(a) which specifies required parts of the HAVA
State Plan. This chapter replaces the implementation Chapter V from
2003 HAVA State Plan. While the 2003 plan focused heavily on the
initial deployment of voting system components and the related
education of the public and local election officials, emphasis in the
2008 plan is on continuing the integrity Georgia's voting system
(including component replacements) and on replacing the 1993 computer
system supporting statewide voter registration and state elections
administration.
4.2 Successful Implementation of the 2003 State Plan
After enactment of Georgia's Senate Bill 258 on June of 2003, the
Georgia HAVA State Plan was adopted on December 10, 2003 and published
by the U.S. EAC in the Federal Register on March 24, 2004.
Implementation followed immediately in 2004.
Implementation of Georgia's 2003 HAVA State Plan has been a
success. Financial reporting on annual expenditures, use of the State's
five percent funding match, and of Georgia's on-going maintenance of
effort at or above the State Fiscal Year 2000 amount have been reported
separately in Georgia's annual Financial Status Report and accompanying
narrative. Only the replacement of the computer system supporting
statewide voter registration and election administration was deferred
from the previous plan for action in the current plan. A summary of
accomplishments and activity is presented in the following sections.
4.2.1 2004 Implementation of the 2003 State Plan
1. In 2002 Georgia replaced all punch card and lever voting
machines through State purchase and deployment of 19,015 DRE voting
units (approximately one for every 200 active voters) to establish a
statewide uniform, accessible
[[Page 54147]]
voting system. During 2004 the state was reimbursed under HAVA
provisions for voting system replacement.
2. To improve voting machine availability and to support in-person
absentee voting, an additional 955 DRE voting units were purchased and
distributed to counties prior to the November 2004 General Election.
3. The State purchased 24,250 additional flash memory cards for the
DRE voting units to provide greater efficiency in preparing for
federal, state, and local runoffs resulting from elections held during
the 2004 General Election Cycle.
4. The State acquired state-specific voter access cards and
supervisor cards for use with DRE voting units purchased in compliance
with Title II and the voting system standards of Title III Section 201.
These state-specific cards enabled the State of Georgia to provide
increased security for the state's uniform voting system.
5. The State provided election officials in all counties with three
days of technical support for DRE voting units and GEMS servers
technology for each of the following elections held in 2004:
Presidential Preference Primary, Primary Election, Primary Runoff,
General Election and General Election Runoff.
6. The Department of State Audits completed an audit of the State
HAVA Fund.
7. Ballot building became a cooperative program between the
Secretary of State's Office and the Kennesaw State University Center
for Election Systems to support statewide ballot quality and
timeliness. Related instructional materials were provided on voting
system components and voting system supplies to all 159 counties for
use during 2004 federal and state election cycle.
8. Acceptance testing for all voting equipment and the
responsibilities for related equipment evaluation, local election
official training and support, and overall voting system security were
added to duties that Kennesaw State University Center for Election
Systems conducts for the Secretary of State.
9. The State developed and distributed statewide HAVA compliant
polling place posters, voter registration materials and other forms for
elections administration.
10. The State presented training to support implementation to local
election officials through: The Georgia Election Official Certification
program; conferences of statewide election official associations
(Georgia Election Officials Association, Voter Registrars Association
of Georgia, and Georgia Municipal Association); classes at Kennesaw
State University Center for Elections; and through regional and county
level sessions.
11. The State provided voting system demonstrations and education
to voters and assisted county officials in doing so as well.
12. The statewide voter registration system was enhanced with
system upgrades, and counties were supported with related instruction,
helpdesk support and connectivity support.
13. Compliant provisional voting procedures were implemented using
newly created materials.
14. Accessibility for voters with disabilities was assessed for
each polling place by surveying each county. Results were used by the
Secretary of State to help define training needs, create a training
video and brochure, and to guide grant participation in the program
administered by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for
polling place accessibility improvements.
15. The required administrative complaint process was put in place
through rule-making and implementation by the Secretary of State.
Information relating to the Administrative Complaint Process can also
be found on the Secretary of State's Web site at http://
www.sos.state.ga.us.
4.2.2 2005 Implementation of the 2003 State Plan
1. An optical scan ballot tabulator was purchased and deployed to
every county to improve the processing of mailed absentee ballots.
2. Electronic poll books (ExpressPolls) were purchased for each
polling place to streamline the voting process and further enhance the
voting system and the preparation of registered voter lists.
ExpressPolls also replaced the encoder component necessary for
accessing election ballots on the DRE voting units.
3. The Secretary of State conducted regional training for the 159
county election superintendents and their staff on the use of DRE
voting systems, related HAVA requirements and additional federal laws
for improved elections administration.
4. Proper management of the State HAVA Fund was assured through an
audit by the Department of State Audits.
5. The State acquired three backup computer servers, memory card
duplication equipment for ExpressPolls and extended warranty on the DRE
voting units to ensure proper maintenance in preparation for the 2006
General Election.
6. The Secretary of State made initial assessments of the
availability of vendors who might provide a new voter registration
system and of the higher level requirements of such a system.
7. The Secretary of State continued programs for voter education
and outreach programs; local election official training, voting system
procedures and security enhancements, ballot building, polling place
accessibility, and for the voter registration system's security
monitoring, maintenance, and system upgrades.
4.2.3 2006 Implementation of the 2003 State Plan
1. Equipment to duplicate flash cards for use in ExpressPolls was
purchased to improve processing for each election.
2. The security of the statewide voter registration system was
improved with the addition of a dynamic security password for database
access.
3. The Secretary of State provided local election officials in
every county with three days of technical support for DRE voting units,
GEMS servers technology, and electronic poll books (ExpressPolls) in
each of the following elections: Primary Election, Primary Runoff,
General Election and General Election Runoff.
4. Programs continued for voter education and outreach programs;
local election official training, voting system procedures and security
enhancements, ballot building, polling place accessibility, and for the
voter registration system's security monitoring, maintenance, and
system upgrades.
4.2.4 2007 Implementation of the 2003 State Plan
1. Electronic poll book (ExpressPolls) were upgraded to facilitate
uploading to the statewide voter registration system the voters' record
of having participated in the election and other enhancements
recommended by local election officials.
2. The Secretary of State contracted for regional quick response
teams to be available for technical support to county election
officials for electronic poll books, voting units and GEMS servers
technology for the February 2008 Presidential Preference Primary.
3. Prepared to contract a 2008 statewide program for maintenance
and limited replacement of GEMS servers used in each county.
4. Polling place accessibility was again surveyed, program
materials updated, additional grant funds received, and reimbursements
were made for approved remedial improvements completed by counties.
[[Page 54148]]
5. Programs continued for voter education and outreach programs;
local election official training, voting system procedures and security
enhancements, ballot building, and for the voter registration system's
security monitoring, maintenance, and system upgrades.
4.2.5 2008 Implementation of the 2003 State Plan
1. The Secretary of State contracted for regional quick response
teams to be available for technical support to county election
officials for electronic poll books, voting units and GEMS servers
technology for the following elections held in 2008: Presidential
Preference Primary, Primary Election, Primary Runoff, General Election
and General Election Runoff.
2. A statewide program for maintenance and limited replacement of
GEMS servers used in each county was carried out.
3. Programs continued for voter education and outreach programs;
local election official training, voting system procedures and security
enhancements, polling place accessibility, ballot building, and for the
voter registration system's security monitoring, maintenance, and
system upgrades.
Chapter 5--Implementation of the 2008 HAVA State Plan, Amended
Chapter 5 presents Georgia's plans for 2008 and following years. It
consists of 13 parts, one for each section of HAVA 254(a), which sets
forth the required content of the state plan. Parts 5.1 through 5.13
each begin with the statutory requirement of that part of the plan and
the following portion provides Georgia's fulfillment of that
requirement.
5.1 Use of Requirements Payments
Part 5.1 of Georgia's State Plan implementation describes ``how the
State will use the requirements payments to meet the requirements of
Title III, and if applicable under Section 251(a)(2), to carry out
other activities to improve administration of elections'' as required
by Public Law 107-252, Help America Vote Act of 2002, Section
254(a)(1).
To continue meeting the requirements of Title III in 2008 and
following years, Georgia will expend funds for the following purposes:
1. A portion of the Requirements Payments will be used to conduct
maintenance on servers used as part of the statewide uniform electronic
voting system, and to replace aging servers and other voting system
components.
2. A portion of the Requirements Payments will be used to replace
the fifteen-year-old (1993) centralized voter registration system
currently being used by the State. The new system will allow an easier
interface and more efficient system functions (e.g., electronic sharing
and comparison of data among units of government to confirm voter
eligibility).
3. Additional expenditures may be made in the following areas:
Voter education activities;
Election official training activities;
Development of Statewide Uniform Poll Worker Training
Curriculum and Handbook;
Any other activities allowed under HAVA.
5.2 Distribution and Monitoring
Part 5.2 of Georgia's State Plan implementation describes ``how the
State will distribute and monitor the distribution of the requirements
payment to units of local government or other entities in the State for
carrying out the activities described in paragraph (1), including a
description of--(A) the criteria to be used to determine the
eligibility of such units or entities for receiving the payment; and
(B) the methods to be used by the State to monitor the performance of
the units or entities to whom the payment is distributed, consistent
with the performance goals and measures adopted under paragraph 8'' as
required by Public Law 107-252, Help America Vote Act of 2002, Section
254(a)(2).
5.2.1 Distribution of Requirements Payments--Section 254(a)(2)(A)
As the State's chief election official, the Secretary of State is
authorized by O.C.G.A. Sec. 21-2-300 to implement and deploy a
statewide uniform voting system for use by local election officials in
county, state, and federal elections.
The Secretary of State will centrally administer expenditures to
maintain the reliability of the statewide uniform voting system so
there will be no related fund distributions among counties. In 2008,
emphasis will be on conducting server maintenance and assessing the
need to replace individual servers. Servicing, replacement of
components, and replacement of servers will be as deemed prudent by the
Secretary of State. The HAVA State Plan, Amended anticipates replacing
up to all 170 servers used to tabulate votes in each of Georgia's 159
counties during 2008 and following years, including a small inventory
for emergency replacement and dedicated training units.
An individual county will be deemed eligible to receive a
replacement server when, in the judgment of the Secretary of State,
replacement of the existing unit is warranted based on considerations
including, but not limited to, the age of the unit, the service history
of the unit, the nature of pending repairs, and the continuing
availability of parts.
Intergovernmental Agreements for use of voting equipment remain in
place as do past practices of maintaining inventory listings and access
logs.
The Secretary of State will centrally administer expenditures
supporting the replacement of the 1993 statewide voter registration
system with a modern system so there will be no related fund
distributions among counties. Counties will all receive training and
helpdesk support in the use of the new system.
5.2.2 Monitoring of Requirements Payments--Section 254(a)(2)(B)
The Secretary of State is responsible for disbursing and tracking
Title I and Title II funds for the projects to enhance election
administration.
If local units of government (or other entities) receive payments,
the Secretary of State will monitor the performance of those parties
consistent with performance goals and measures adopted under Section 8
of this chapter. Allocation request forms and expense codes created to
implement the 2003 HAVA State Plan would continue to be used, or
modified, as appropriate to monitor and track HAVA spending. Agreements
specifying the use of the funds would be entered into prior to
disbursements being made. Recipients may be required to submit written
reports to the Secretary of State indicating the status and level of
success of any project or activity receiving funding through the
Secretary of State.
Audits conducted by the State of Georgia Department of Audits and
Accounts will be used to monitor HAVA expenditures.
5.3 Voter Education and Training
Part 5.3 of Georgia's State Plan implementation describes ``how the
State will provide for programs for voter education, election official
education and training, and poll worker training which will assist the
State in meeting the requirements of Title III'' as required by Public
Law 107-252, Help America Vote Act of 2002, Section 254(a)(3).
5.3.1 Voter Education
Since the 2002 general election, introduction of Georgia's uniform
statewide voting system, voters have become very familiar with their
voting equipment through educational
[[Page 54149]]
programs and its use in 3 statewide election cycles.
Continuing voter education focuses on reaching voters who are new
to Georgia's voting process. This includes youth who are about to reach
voting age, as well as newly registered adults. The Secretary of
State's Web site posts information showing current voting equipment and
how it is used, to which all voters may refer. In addition, county
election officials publically display demonstration voting units before
elections. The Secretary of State will continue to explore voter
education outreach in cooperation with local election officials and
non-governmental organizations.
5.3.2 Election Official Training
The Secretary of State's Office continues to train local election
officials on the use of Georgia's voting system to properly conduct
elections. The Secretary of State's Office maintains an election lab
for voting equipment training and offers local election officials
regularly scheduled classes on the use of the statewide uniform voting
system components for specific elections tasks.
Georgia's election law requires local election officials to become
certified by completing up to 64 hours of courses approved by the
Secretary of State. O.C.G.A. 21-2-101. Georgia's certification program
for local election officials continues to be updated based on lessons
learned from previous elections. It is anticipated that this program
will be further expanded and customized for county election
superintendents and registrars, as well as for municipal election
officials.
Georgia election law also requires local election officials to
obtain on-going training. O.C.G.A. 21-2-100(a). Annual training
conferences have been, and continue to be, conducted in collaboration
with statewide election official associations.
Certification and on-going training programs include the electronic
voting system; polling place procedures and poll worker training;
local, state, and federal election laws governing administrative
duties; disability access initiatives; voter registration and education
initiatives; new legislation that affects local, state, and federal
election laws; and any other topics that may enhance the administration
of elections.
5.4 Voting System Standards
Part 5.4 of Georgia's State Plan implementation describes ``how the
State will adopt voting system guidelines and processes, which are
consistent with the requirements of Section 301'' as required by Public
Law 107-252, Help America Vote Act of 2002, Section 254(a)(4).
Voting System Guidelines adopted by the 21st Century Voting
Commission and used to select the statewide uniform electronic voting
system used in the 2002 General Election were established in 2001 and
passed into law by the Georgia General Assembly in 2001 through Senate
Bill 213. O.C.G.A. 21-2-300.
5.5 Election Fund Established
Part 5.5 of Georgia's State Plan implementation describes ``how the
State will establish a Fund described in subsection (b) for purposes of
administering the State's activities under this part, including
information on fund management'' as required by Public Law 107-252,
Help America Vote Act of 2002, Section 254(a)(5).
With the approval from the State of Georgia Department of Audits,
the Office of Secretary of State established a separate bank account
for the Election Fund and has assigned an internal identification code
for tracking the expenditures. The Election Fund has been designated as
a federal election fund account that shall only be used for the
enhancement and continuation of election administration. The Fund also
contains individual expenditure codes for tracking Section 101, Section
102, Title II, and matching fund expenditures.
5.6 Proposed Budget
Part 5.6 of Georgia's State Plan implementation describes ``how the
State's proposed budget for activities under this part, based on the
State's best estimates of the costs of such activities and the amount
of funds to be made available, including specific information on:
(A) The costs of the activities required to be carried out to meet
the requirements of Title III;
(B) The portion of the requirements payment which will be used to
carry out activities to meet such requirements; and
(C) The portion of the requirements payment which will be used to
carry out other activities'' as required by Public Law 107-252, Help
America Vote Act of 2002, Section 254(a)(6).
5.6.1 Available Funds
The U.S. Omnibus Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Pub. L.
110-161) includes $115 million in ``Requirements Payments'' to help
states improve the administration of Federal elections under HAVA,
Title II, Subtitle D, Part 1. Georgia is eligible for $3,169,840 of
these funds. To receive its allocated portion, Georgia will certify its
eligibility as prescribed in HAVA Section 253. As part of this
certification, Georgia will affirm the state's appropriation of the
required match of at least 5 percent ($166,834).
As of July 2008 the State of Georgia had approximately $1,137,260
remaining from earlier HAVA disbursements under Title I and $497,587
remaining from disbursements under Title II.
Activities are planned anticipating the full availability of new
funds appropriated in 2008 and of funds retained from appropriations in
earlier years.
Table 3--Available HAVA Funds
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal funds State match Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remaining Title I Funds................. $1,137,260 (already spent)................. $1,137,260
Remaining Title II Funds................ $497,587 (already spent)................. $497,587
2008 Funds Title II..................... $3,169,840 $166,834........................ $3,336,674
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Funds Available............... ................. ................................ $4,971,521
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5.6.2 Planned Activities
To address requirements of Title III in 2008 and following years,
Georgia will expend funds for the following purposes contingent upon
priorities discussed below as well as the availability of funds:
[[Page 54150]]
Table 4--Planned Activity and Costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Activity Estimated costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Voting System Maintenance and $100,000 to $450,000.
Component Replacement.
2. Centralized Voter $8 million to $15 million.
Registration System.
3. Training, Outreach, and Other $50,000 to $500,000.
Activities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Voting System Maintenance and Component Replacement: A portion
of the available funds will be used to conduct maintenance of voting
systems and to repair or replace components as needed. Many components
of Georgia's statewide electronic voting system were put in place in
2002. To ensure the on-going integrity of Georgia's voting system, a
preventive maintenance program will extend the operational life of
servers, improve security, and identify any current or potential
component replacement needs.
The replacement of aging servers at each county will be a high
priority. Actions necessary to support county voting system servers in
an approaching election will have first priority. It is anticipated
that 168 servers will be replaced during 2008 and the following years
at a cost of approximately $400,000. This will accommodate one server
per county, as well as a small State inventory for emergency
replacement and dedicated training units.
2. Centralized Voter Registration System: A portion of the
available funds will be used to replace the fifteen-year old (1993)
statewide voter registration database currently being used by the
State. The 1993 system is antiquated and requires extensive
maintenance. Very high operating costs (by the keystroke) and high
maintenance costs of this system are an on-going burden. Replacing the
system will: allow for more effective use of elections funds; help
ensure the quality and reliability of voter registration data
management; give every county a more reliable and efficient interface
with the centralized voter registration system; and allow improved
integration with related election administration and reporting
functions.
Under the 2003 HAVA State Plan, the Secretary of State conducted a
preliminary assessment of available vendors that were capable of
replacing the current system with a state-of-the-art system. The
Secretary of State also compiled a high level requirements analysis for
the successor system. The next steps of this process are to prepare
detailed performance specifications, including a functional
requirements analysis of the new system, and then to proceed with
building, testing, and deployment.
The estimated cost of the new system is $8 to $15 million. The use
of HAVA funds from both Title I and Title II is anticipated.
3. Training, Outreach, and Other Activities: As described in
Section 5.3, the State of Georgia will continue to conduct outreach to
voters who need to be introduced to the voting system used throughout
the state. In addition, training will continue to be provided to local
election officials on the use of Georgia's voting system and voter
registration system to properly conduct elections. Enhancing voters'
access to processes related to poll location, registration status
confirmation, complaints, and status of absentee and provisional
balloting may also be addressed. In the future, consideration may also
be given to evaluating replacement of Georgia's present electronic
voting equipment as it begins to age. Use of HAVA funds for these
activities is contingent upon the availability of funds.
5.7 Maintenance of Effort
Part 5.7 of Georgia's State Plan implementation describes ``how the
State, in using the requirements payment, will maintain the
expenditures of the State for activities funded by the payment at a
level that is not less than the level of such expenditures maintained
by the State for the fiscal year prior to November 2000'' as required
by Public Law 107-252, Help America Vote Act of 2002, Section
254(a)(7).
The State of Georgia will continue to maintain or exceed that level
of election administration expenditures incurred during the State
Fiscal Year 2000 ($4,598,813) while conducting activities that fall
under the Title III requirements of the Help America Vote Act.
5.8 Performance Goals and Measures
Part 5.8 of Georgia's State Plan implementation describes ``how the
State will adopt performance goals and measures that will be used by
the State to determine its success and the success of units of local
government in the State in carrying out the plan, including timetables
for meeting each of the elements of the Plan, descriptions of the
criteria the State will use to measure performance and the process used
to develop such criteria, and a description of which official is to be
held responsible for ensuring that each performance goal is met'' as
required by Public Law 107-252, Help America Vote Act of 2002, Section
254(a)(8).
In collaboration with local election officials, the Secretary of
State establishes goals and performance measures to ensure compliance
with HAVA requirements. Regular reviews of Georgia's election laws,
policies, and procedures help ensure that election administration and
voter registration processes are impartial and efficient and subject to
on-going improvements.
5.8.1 Performance Goals
For the initial implementation and deployment of the statewide
uniform electronic voting system Georgia developed milestones and goals
through the 21st Century Voting Commission as described earlier in
detail. Milestones remain for having system components in place and
tested before each election, local election officials trained in a
timely manner, and for Election Day performance reporting. Scheduling
for individual milestones is periodically reviewed and subject to
change by the Secretary of State in consultation with local election
officials and other parties knowledgable in the matters under
consideration.
In 2008, and the years following, maintenance and replacement of
GEMS servers in each county will be done in a manner to continue past
performance of the statewide uniform electronic voting system. Any
additional goals and measures will be addressed by the Secretary of
State in the particular contract's statement of work under which the
task is carried out.
5.8.2 Performance Measures
As preparations begin to develop Georgia's new voter registration
system, the Secretary of State will develop a project team to develop
project goals and measures to be incorporated in related RFPs and
contract statement-of-work clauses. It is anticipated that input will
be solicited from local election officials as well as from other
Georgia State Agencies who will interact with the Secretary of State in
replacing the
[[Page 54151]]
existing system, and in using the new system.
Additionally, the Secretary of State periodically convenes an
Elections Advisory Committee of local officials which provides input on
enhancing election administration within the State. Through this
process additional goals and measures may also be developed to further
other objectives of HAVA.
5.9 Administrative Complaint Procedures
Part 5.9 of Georgia's State Plan implementation provides ``a
description of the uniform, nondiscriminatory state-based
administrative complaint procedures in effect under section 402'' as
required by Public Law 107-252, Help America Vote Act of 2002, Section
254(a)(9).
5.9.1 Georgia Rulemaking and Certification
Georgia's administrative complaint process is provided in Georgia
Rule 590-8-1-.01 ``Administrative Complaint Procedure for Violations of
Title III of the Help America Vote Act of 2002'' adopted May 11, 2004
under authority provided in O.C.G.A. Secs. 21-2-1 and 21-2-50.2. Text
of Georgia Rule 590-8-2-.01 was certified to the EAC which published it
in the Federal Register, Vol. 70, No. 169, Thursday, September 1, 2005
at page 52160. These procedures, described below, provide a uniform
manner in which to receive and resolve any complaints alleging a
violation of HAVA.
5.9.2 Administrative Complaint Process
Georgia Rule 590-8-1-.01 ``Administrative Complaint Procedure for
Violations of Title III of the Help America Vote Act of 2002'' provides
as follows:
(1) Any person who believes that a violation of any provision of
Title III of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-252; 42
U.S.C. 15301, et seq.) has occurred, is occurring, or is about to occur
may file a complaint with the Secretary of State. Such complaint shall
be open to inspection by the public during business hours upon
reasonable notice.
(2) Such complaint shall be in writing and shall be signed and
sworn to by the person making the complaint and shall be properly
notarized in accordance with state law. The complaint shall be
delivered to and served upon the Secretary of State as the chief state
election official in person, by U.S. Mail, or by guaranteed overnight
delivery.
(3) The Secretary of State shall investigate the allegations of
such complaint. If more than one complaint is filed concerning the same
alleged violation, the Secretary of State may consolidate such
complaints for investigation.
(4) If the complainant requests, the Secretary of State or a
designee thereof shall conduct a hearing on the allegations of the
complaint. Such hearing may be by telephone, conference call, or in
person and shall be recorded.
(5) If the Secretary of State or a designee thereof determines that
such complaint is unfounded, the Secretary of State may dismiss the
complaint and notify the complainant of her decision. The Secretary of
State shall make the results of her investigation into the complaint
available for public inspection during normal business hours upon
reasonable notice after the matter has been resolved
(6) The Secretary of State or designee thereof shall make a
determination of the validity of the complaint within 90 days following
the date on which the complaint is received by and filed with the
Secretary of State unless the complainant agrees to an extension of
such time period.
(7) If the Secretary of State or designee thereof determines that
such complaint is valid, the Secretary of State shall take all
necessary and appropriate actions within her authority to address the
violation; and
(8) If the Secretary of State or designee thereof does not render a
final determination on a complaint filed pursuant to this rule within
90 days after the complaint is filed, or within any extension period to
which the complainant has agreed, the Secretary of State or designee
thereof will, on or before the third business day after the final
determination was due to be issued, initiate proceedings for
alternative dispute resolution;
(a) To facilitate alternative dispute resolution, the Secretary of
State shall maintain a list of qualified independent professionals who
are capable of acting as a mediator, from which the Secretary of State
or designee thereof and the complainant shall each choose one mediator
to review the case.
(b) The Secretary of State or designee thereof shall designate in
writing to the complainant the name of a mediator from the list
referenced in section (a) to serve on an alternative dispute resolution
panel (resolution panel) to review the complaint.
1. If proceedings for alternative dispute resolution are initiated
pursuant to this paragraph, not later than 3 business days after the
complainant receives such a designation from the Secretary of State or
designee thereof, the complainant shall designate in writing to the
Secretary of State or designee thereof the name of a second mediator.
If the complainant fails to designate a mediator within the time
allowed above, the sole mediator shall review the record from the
hearing and make a final recommendation based on the submitted record.
Not later than 3 business days after such a designation by the
complainant, the two mediators so designated shall select a third
mediator to complete the resolution panel. If the complainant fails to
designate a mediator within the time allowed above, the sole mediator
shall review and dispose of the matter without selecting a second or
third mediator.
2. The mediator or resolution panel may review the record compiled
in connection with the complaint, including, without limitation, the
investigative file on the matter, the audio recording of the hearing,
any transcript of the hearing and any briefs or memoranda submitted by
the parties but shall not receive any additional testimony or evidence
to resolve the matter.
3. The mediator or resolution panel by a majority vote, shall after
reviewing the record referenced above, provide a recommendation to the
Secretary of State not later than 50 days after the final determination
of the Secretary of State was due. This period for issuing a written
recommendation will not be extended.
4. Upon receipt of the recommendation from the mediator or
resolution panel, the Secretary of State or designee thereof shall
issue a final order pursuant to the authority granted under O.C.G.A.
21-2-50.2(c), but such remedy shall not exceed the remedies available
under Title III of the Help America Vote Act of 2002.
5. The final order of the Secretary of State or designee thereof
will be:
(i) Mailed to the complainant, each respondent and any other person
who requested in writing to be advised of the final resolution;
(ii) Posted on the website of the Secretary of State; and
(iii) Made available by the Secretary of State, upon request by any
interested person.
6. A final determination by the Secretary of State or designee
thereof is not subject to appeal in any state or federal court.
5.10 Effect of Title I Payments
Part 5.10 of Georgia's State Plan implementation provides ``if the
State received any payment under Title I, a
[[Page 54152]]
description of how such payment will affect the activities proposed to
be carried out under the plan, including the amount of funds available
for such activities'' as required by Public Law 107-252, Help America
Vote Act of 2002, Section 254(a)(10).
As set forth in the 2003 HAVA State Plan, Title I, Section 102
funds were used to service bond indebtedness generated by the purchase
of a statewide electronic voting system to replace all punch card and
lever voting systems in Georgia. This program was timely concluded.
Title I, Section 101 funds will allow the State to begin the
process of acquiring a new voter registration system to replace the
1993 system currently in use. This activity is described in Section
5.6. This project was anticipated in the 2003 HAVA State Plan. While
preliminary assessments were started, detailed requirements analysis,
acquisition, testing and deployment remain. Title I, Section 101 funds
available for this activity are estimated as being $1,137,260.
5.11 Management of the Plan
Part 5.11 of Georgia's State Plan implementation describes ``how
the state will conduct ongoing management of the Plan'' as required by
Public Law 107-252, Help America Vote Act of 2002, Section 254(a)(11).
The Elections Division of the Secretary of State will manage the
Plan. The Election Division will continue to oversee continuation of
existing projects as well as newly created election projects.
``Material Changes'' to the Plan may be developed on a periodic
basis as necessary to reflect new milestones and performance measures
used to gauge the effectiveness of the Plan and to accommodate emerging
needs in the future.
5.12 Previous State Plan Implementation and Changes
Part 5.12 of Georgia's State Plan implementation describes how
``the case of a State with a State Plan in effect * * * during the
previous fiscal year, * * * how the Plan reflects changes from the
State Plan for the previous fiscal year and of how the State succeeded
in carrying out the State Plan for such previous fiscal year'' as
required by Public Law 107-252, Help America Vote Act of 2002, Section
254(a)(12).
The summary of the changes that the 2008 HAVA State Plan, Amended
makes to the 2003 plan, and of how the State succeeded in carrying out
the 2003 HAVA State Plan previously in effect is provided in detail in
the preceding chapter.
5.13 State Plan Committee
Part 5.13 of Georgia's State Plan implementation provides ``a
description of the committee, which participated in the development of
the State Plan in accordance with section 255 and the procedures
followed by the committee under such section and section 256'' as
required by Public Law 107-252, Help America Vote Act of 2002, Section
254(a)(13).
The ``2008 HAVA State Plan Committee'' is comprised of the
following appointees:
1. Secretary of State's Office, Wesley Tailor, Elections Division
Director;
2. Fulton County: April Pye, Interim Election Supervisor;
3. DeKalb County: Linda Latimore, Election Supervisor;
4. Clarke County: Gail Schrader, Supervisor of Elections and
Registration;
5. Rockdale County: Cynthia Welch, Election Supervisor;
6. Muscogee County: Nancy Boren, Elections and Voter Registration
Director;
7. Richmond County: Lynn Bailey, Election Supervisor;
8. Georgia State ADA Office, Mike Galifianakis, Coordinator.
The 2008 HAVA State Plan Committee continues the work of groups
described in Part One of this report. The success of earlier, larger
initiatives and the much smaller scope of the 2008 amendments allowed
the process in 2008 to be more streamlined than in 2003.
Initial review drafts of the 2008 HAVA State Plan, Amended were
prepared by the Secretary of State's Office and distributed to members
of the State Plan Committee. After reviewing the initial working draft,
the Committee discussed the draft and proposed edits. After
incorporating input, the Preliminary 2008 State Plan, Amended was
posted for public comment. Comments were compiled by the Secretary of
State's Office, shared with the Committee, and addressed as appropriate
in the Final 2008 HAVA State Plan, Amended before being submitted to
the Election Assistance Commission for publishing in the Federal
Register.
Appendix 1--2003 Status & Implementation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
12/10/03 Status Provision mandated by HAVA Implemented
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Voting System Standards
------------------------------------------------------------------------
v..................... Permit voter to verify 2002.
votes selected before
casting ballot.
v..................... Provide voter opportunity 2002.
to change/correct ballot
before casting ballot.
v..................... Offer notice if voter 2002.
selects votes for more
than 1 candidate for a
single office.
v..................... Voting system shall ensure 2002.
that any notification
required preserves voter
privacy.
v..................... System must produce a 2002.
record with an audit
capacity (satisfied by
audit capacity redundant
electronic storage).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accessibility for Individuals With Disabilities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
v..................... Voting system must be 2002.
accessible for
individuals with
disabilities, including
visual impairment and
must preserve voter
privacy and must offer
independence in voting.
v..................... At least 1 DRE with 2002.
accessibility for
disabled individuals at
each place.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Error Rates of System
------------------------------------------------------------------------
v..................... Error rates of system 2002.
shall comply with error
rate standards of FEC.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 54153]]
Uniform Definition of What Constitutes a Vote
------------------------------------------------------------------------
~..................... State must adopt uniform State Election Board
and nondiscriminatory Rule 183-1-15-.02,
standards that define May, 2004.
what constitutes a vote
and what will be counted
as vote for each voting
system used in state.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Provisional Voting
------------------------------------------------------------------------
v..................... Must have provisional vote 2002.
option.
v..................... To cast provisional 2002.
ballot, voter must (1)
affirm in writing that
the person is a
registered voter in the
jurisdiction; (2) is
eligible to vote in that
election.
~..................... Provisional voter must be Authorized by SB 258
given information as to and Implemented
how to determine if vote 2004.
was counted, and if not,
the reason vote was not
counted.
~..................... Provisional voter must be Authorized by SB 258
given access to a toll- and Implemented
free number or Web site 2004.
that may be used to
determine whether vote
was counted or not;
access may be provided at
county level.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Voting Information Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
~..................... Voting information (sample Implemented 2004.
ballot, date/hours of
election, instructions on
casting a ballot/
provisional ballot,
instructions for mail-in
registrants who are first
time voters, information
on federal and state
election laws) must be
publicly posted at each
polling place on each
election for federal
office.
~..................... Voters casting ballots Authorized by SB 258
after normal hours (i.e., and Implemented
court ordered extension) 2004.
must vote a provisional
ballot kept separate from
other provisional ballots.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Computerized Statewide Voter Registration List Requirement
------------------------------------------------------------------------
v..................... Implement a single, Implemented before
uniform, centralized, 2002.
interactive, computerized
statewide voter
registration list defined
and administered at state
level.
v..................... Computerized list shall Authorized by SB 258
serve as the single and Implemented
system for storing and 2004.
managing official list of
registered voters (first
time voters must be
identified on list).
v..................... List shall have unique Implemented before
identifier for each 2002.
registered voter of state.
v..................... List shall be coordinated Implemented before
with other state agency 2002.
databases (in conjunction
with on-going system
upgrade).
v..................... Registration information Implemented before
must be promptly entered 2002.
into database upon
receipt of local election
officials.
v..................... Electronic list shall Implemented before
serve as official list 2002.
for federal elections.
v..................... Names to be removed from Implemented before
list must follow 2002.
procedures outlined in
NVRA.
v..................... List is to be maintained Implemented before
to remove ineligible 2002.
voters, including:.
Convicted felons.
Death............
Duplicate Names..
v..................... Appropriate technological Implemented before
security measures shall 2002.
be provided to protect
list.
v..................... The election system must Implemented before
be set up for minimum 2002.
maintenance standards
consistent with NVRA.
v..................... Upon application for voter Implemented before
registration, applicant 2002, modified
must provide a unique 2004.
identifying number as
prescribed by HAVA [Note:
States using a SSN are
grandfathered into this
provision as unique
identifier requirement is
met].
v..................... The chief election Implemented before
official and the state 2002 (with on-going
motor vehicle authority enhancements).
shall enter into an
agreement to match data
to the extent required to
verify the accuracy of
data provided for voter
registration.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requirements for First Time Voters Who Register by Mail
------------------------------------------------------------------------
v..................... For individuals that Authorized by SB 258
register by mail and have and Implemented
not previously voted 2004.
within the state.
IF VOTING IN
PERSON: (1) Presents
current and valid photo
ID; or (2) presents a
copy of a current utility
bill, bank statement,
government check,
paycheck or other
government document
showing name and address
of voter.
IF PERSON VOTES
BY MAIL: Absentee ballot
must contain (1) Copy of
current and valid photo
ID; or (2) a copy of a
current utility bill,
bank statement,
government check,
paycheck or other
government document that
shows name and address of
voter.
v..................... FAIL SAFE VOTING: For Authorized by SB 258
first-time voters and Implemented
registering by mail that 2004.
do not provide required
identification may be
allowed to cast a
provisional ballot.
v..................... Registration forms must Modified 2004 Forms.
conform to NVRA and HAVA
(including first time
voter information.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
v = Mandate met.
~ = Minor administrative adjustment required.
[[Page 54154]]
[FR Doc. E8-21800 Filed 9-17-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-KF-P