Successful HAVA Implementation State Reports

NASED Winter Meeting - February 2006 Alaska Touch Screen Implementation The Alaska Division of Elections has purchased 505 touch screen units with 100 of those units currently in possession in its five election offices statewide. All units will be received by mid-March and sent to the precincts for statewide use in the 2006 Primary Election on August 22. Election staff has received comprehensive training using the touch screen units, but will receive additional training on how to effectively train poll workers in using the new machines. Alaska will continue to use its optical scan units as it has in the past in addition to using the new touch screen units.

Updated Voter Registration System During 2005, Alaska completed the procurement process for a statewide voter registration system. The new system will replace Alaska’s existing mainframe-based statewide voter registration system. Training for the Division of Election’s staff on the new system will begin in March. System implementation is scheduled for April 28, 2006. Requirements outlined in sections 303(a) and (b) of HAVA have already been met in Alaska.

Satellite Offices To increase accessibility to the voting process, two additional election offices are being established in parts of Alaska where there has been increased growth in population. The newly added offices will offer voters additional opportunities to contact the Division of Election and the Division will also benefit from increased visibility. Open houses for these offices are scheduled for early May 2006.

Hub Training The Division of Election’s “Hub Training” system for training poll workers in remote, rural areas of Alaska continues to be successful. Leading up to the 2004 General Election, the Division began this method for training poll workers. This method allows the Division to more effectively train workers simultaneously closer to Election Day. This method continues to be an effective means of outreach and training for rural workers. Establishing a Stand Alone Absentee Office The by-mail and by-fax absentee ballot function has resided within the Division of Elections Director’s office in Juneau, however this year the Division of Elections has decided to establish a stand alone absentee office in Anchorage. This location allows for additional space and alleviates the transportation issues confronting the Division. This change also cuts down the time necessary to mail absentee ballots to those who have requested them. Alaska has seen a dramatic increase in by-mail and by-fax absentee applications and the establishment of an absentee voting office will allow for additional expansion of this service.

Accessibility Survey Training In May of 2005, the Division of Elections staff participated in training that demonstrated how to determine whether polling places met the American’s With Disability Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG) for polling facilities. Training included topics such as how to conduct an accessibility survey and what temporary solutions can be used to make a facility compliant. Arizona Voting Systems Punch Card Replacement - Arizona did not ask for a two-year waiver to replace punch card voting equipment used in the State. Arizona replaced punch card election systems in 10 of 15 counties, putting all 15 counties in Arizona on optical scan election system technology, the main voting technology used in Arizona. This project was completed by the Presidential Preference Election held in February of 2004.

Accessible Voting Systems Acquisition - Arizona awarded a contract in late 2005 for the purchase of accessible voting systems. One accessible voting system will be in each Arizona precinct by the 2006 Federal elections. Arizona plans to use them for the first time in the local May 2006 elections. Statewide Voter Registration System Arizona was one of eleven states not to ask for a two-year waiver for compliance with the voter registration requirements contained in the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). Arizona implemented a statewide voter registration system on January 1, 2004. The initial system called Voter Registration Arizona (VRAZ) received updates from all counties once a day. All voter registration records that were added or modified were updated to the statewide database and checked against the motor vehicle database, vital statistics, and court records. In addition, each new voter registration record was checked to determine if there was a duplicate record on the statewide list. Arizona was the third state to fully implement the last four-digit check with the Social Security Administration. Arizona recently awarded a contract to IBM and Election Systems & Software (ES&S) to build a more comprehensive statewide voter registration system. The new Voter Registration Arizona System II will use ES&S’s PowerProfile Enterprise Edition voter registration and election management software with the goal of implementing a secure, centralized database of registered voters. The Web-based system will enable election officials in all Arizona counties to process registrations realtime on a centralized system, identify and eliminate duplicate voter registrations and, when necessary, automatically transfer voters from county to county. The new system will greatly facilitate all fifteen counties performing all registration functions in a common manner. EZ Voter EZ Voter is an e-government application allowing Arizona citizens to register to vote over the Internet in English or Spanish, either as an initial registration or to modify their existing registration. This creative solution combines innovative thinking, technology, and government agency integration and cooperation. Arizona was the first state in the nation to have a real time online voter registration system. EZ Voter was created to improve the voting process in Arizona by making registration more accessible and has helped increase the statewide registration rate. The National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) requires motor vehicle agencies to make voter registration materials available to their citizens. EZ Voter is an innovative extension of that law, making registration easily available anywhere there is Internet access by way of the Motor Vehicle Division’s (MVD) electronic records database. The program was approved by the Department of Justice. In 2005, Arizona added the ability for anyone applying for a driver license to register to vote using the driver license application. The registration information is transmitted electronically from MVD to the county recorders using the EZ Voter system. This has increased voter registration since its implementation in October of 2005 and has eliminated hundreds of hours of paper processing by MVD and the county recorders. Arizona processed over 250,000 voter registrations electronically in 2004. It is anticipated that 40% to 50% of all voter registration records in 2006 will be processed electronically. Military and Overseas Arizona implemented a centralized system to help better facilitate military personnel and overseas citizen voting. The system enables facilitates military and overseas citizens to obtain voter registration materials, request early ballots, and vote by mail or fax. This system was in place for the 2004 elections. In the 2004 election cycle, Arizona received and responded to over a thousand messages from military and overseas voters stationed in over 40 countries. Voter Education Arizona developed a statewide voter education plan for the 2004 election cycle to educate voters on the election process and changes due to HAVA. The voter education plan is currently being modified for the 2006 election cycle. The Arizona Secretary of State recently awarded a contract to a large marketing firm to create and deliver a comprehensive voter education campaign and outreach program to reach all citizens of Arizona. The voter education campaign and outreach program is expected to be a consistent, culturally sensitive, and cohesive theme through media, including TV, radio, print, and mail. The purposes of the campaign will be to educate voters on new voter registration laws, voter identification requirements, how to register to vote, how to use new voting equipment, and other HAVA provisions. Arizona has a culturally diverse population of English, Spanish, and various Native American language speakers. The marketing and education themes will be culturally and politically sensitive to Arizona's diverse population and will be delivered in the languages that are spoken in these communities. Election Assistance for Individuals With Disabilities Section 261 of HAVA provides that funds be made available to states to make the voting process more accessible to individuals with disabilities. Arizona has received its full allotment of funds from the United States Health and Human Services Department each of the three years that funds were available. Arizona has used the funds for projects at the county level to improve accessibility to the election process. Projects include mobile voting units, physical changes to polling places to make them more accessible, web site changes, Braille machines, portable ramps, and ballot call systems. Provisional Ballot

Arizona standardized the process for provisional balloting across the state. Arizona provides citizens a cost free method to find out if their votes were counted, and if not, the reason why. This project was implemented for the 2004 elections. Election Official and Poll Worker Training The Secretary of State provides training to election officials on new election laws and the new election technology every year. The past three years, much of the curriculum pertained to HAVA. For the first time last year, election officials from Arizona’s cities and towns were invited to attend the training. Grievance Process The Secretary of State developed a statewide complaint system to address complaints involving a violation of any provision of Title III of HAVA. The Secretary of State’s office immediately begins the resolution process upon receiving a formal complaint. To inform the public of the process and to make it as easy as possible for the citizens of Arizona, the Secretary of State provides a toll free phone number and Internet access for voters to get assistance with reporting their grievance or to report voter fraud. This process was in place for the 2004 elections. Brewer Voting Action Plan The Brewer Voting Action Plan is the result of a full analysis of Arizona's current voting technology, voting security systems, voting system certification procedures, and the general standards and operating procedures followed by our state and county election officials in administering Arizona's federal and state elections. The purpose of the report was to deliver a comprehensive review and make recommendations to improve election administration in Arizona and to ensure that the citizens of Arizona have the highest degree of confidence in the accuracy and reliability of our election process. The scope of the recommendations contained in the plan covers all federal and state elections under the jurisdiction of the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office. Public input was sought before the plan was finalized. The review revealed hundreds of important technical and practical suggestions for the State of Arizona to improve its voting systems, now and in the future. The Brewer Voting Action Plan can be obtained at the www.azsos.gov/election/Brewer_Voting_Action_Plan/ website. Recount Committee The Arizona statutes establishing recount and contest procedures have been in existence for decades. The voting equipment technology has changed significantly since many of these statutes first became law. In 2005, the Secretary of State appointed an advisory committee to conduct a comprehensive review of these statutes in light of the election process and technology currently in use today. The Advisory Committee determined that there are several changes that will help improve recount and contested election proceedings, policies and procedures. More specifically, the Committee recommended many changes be made to Arizona’s recount and election contest laws to update and improve the process and to take into consideration current and future voting equipment technology. Legislation has been proposed this session to address many of the issues raised in the Advisory Committee’s report. The Advisory Committee report can be found at: www.azsos.gov/election/Brewer_Voting_Action_Plan/Election_Law_Advisory_Committee/. Arkansas I. General Advances in Arkansas Regarding Elections and Voting:

• Voter ID Requirements • Addition of Provisional Voting Opportunities • HAVA Compliant Voter Registration Applications • Distributed over 250,000 New Voter Registration Applications • Created and Distributed New Voter Information Posters Statewide • Implemented New Administrative Complaint Procedures

II. Polling Site Access and ADA Compliance: • Appealed to all Arkansas Counties for Polling Site Reviews • Received $309,029.00 in Federal Grants to Improve Polling Sites • Approved Applications to Distribute $203,487.00 in Grant Funds

III. Statewide Voter Registration System Compliance: • Selected Election Systems and Software as V.R. Vendor • All 75 Arkansas Counties are Live on HAVA Compliant System • PowerProfile is a Windows-based Voter Registration and Election Management System. • The New System Allows Officials to Identify and Eliminate Duplicate Registrations, Search Against Our Other State

Agencies Using Agency Central, and, When Necessary, Transfer Voters From County to County Automatically. IV. Voting System HAVA Compliance:

• Selected Election Systems and Software as Single Voting Machine Vendor

• Secretary Daniels selected the ES&S Model 100, Model 650 and the iVotronic DRE as the Voting Systems to be utilized in Arkansas after January 1, 2006.

• Each County in Arkansas May Choose from Either Precinct Optical Scan, Central Optical Scan Technology or a Full DRE Implementation. Any County Choosing Optical Scan Must Use this System in Combination with one Accessible DRE (with a Voter Verified Paper Trail) per Polling site. VVPAT Mandated by Arkansas Statute Passed by the General Assembly in 2005.

• Phase I of the Voting System Implementation will Address 22 Counties that Used Punch Card/Lever Machines or Hand Counted Votes AND Install One ADA Accessible DRE Machine in all 75 Counties.

• Phase II will Involve the Replacement of Central Count Equipment with Voting Systems Chosen from the Vendor by the November, 2006 General Election.

California California Has Reached Compliance with the Following Major Provisions of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA):

Replace Punch Card Voting Systems (What is this requirement: A voluntary/incentive program created by Congress to allow jurisdictions to replace punch card voting systems. HAVA Section 102.) (pg 8-13) (How has the state complied: CA made $57.3 million in federal funds available; 30 counties eligible.) (Note: Section 301 (c) does not prohibit the use of a voting system in place in Nov. 2000, so long as voting system requirements are met; 301 (a)(B) allows use of a voter education program to meet “overvote” voting system standard; 301 (c)(2) provides that verification of a ballot selections under Section 301(a)(1)(i) may not be defined in a manner that makes it impossible for a paper ballot voting system to meet the requirement to “permit the voter to verify the votes seleted.”) (see pgs. 96-102)

Establish Statewide Voter Registration Database

(What is this requirement: To have a single, official database/list of all state’s (15.9 million) registered voters maintained by the state. HAVA Section 303) (see pgs. 106-124) (How has the state complied: Integrated and synchronized all local voter registration data into a single, official list pursuant to Nov. 2, 2005 agreement with US DOJ; national model for compliance – see press release.)

Implement New Identification Requirements for New Voters

(What is this requirement: First-time voters who register by mail need to show ID, IF they have not provided CDL or partial SSN for verification before casting a ballot. HAVA Section 303 (b)) (see pgs. 117-124) (How has the state complied: Requirements for ID in place since 2004 election cycle; list of appropriate ID adopted per regulation; statewide voter registration list developed pursuant to Nov. 2, 2005 agreement.)

Provide a System to Notify Provisional Voters on Status of Ballot (What is this requirement: All voters casting a provisional ballot must be able to find out through confidential process whether provisional ballot was counted, and, if not, why not.) (HAVA Section 302 (a)(5)(B)) (pg 104) (How has the state complied: Each county has developed a “free access” system and the state continues to monitor compliance with this requirement.)

Create Complaint Procedures for Voter Grievances

(What is this requirement: Each state must have a process in place for voters to lodge a written complaint about the electoral process.) (HAVA Section 402) (pg 126) (How has the state complied: This requirement had to be met before a state could apply for HAVA funds. The complaint form and process was put in place in 2003.)

Create a One-Stop Shop for Military and Overseas Voters

(What is this requirement: Each state had to establish a single clearinghouse for information.) (HAVA Section 702) (pg 145) (How has the state complied: An outreach and information program has been in place since the 2004 election cycle, working closely with counties and federal representatives – the Federal Voting Assistance Program.)

Establish Poll Worker Training Program

(What is the requirement: Poll workers need to be advised/trained in new requirements, what they mean and what to do.) (No specific HAVA requirement; Section 305 provides that method of compliance is left to the states.) (pg 124) (How has the state complied: California counties have a long tradition and well-established poll worker training programs. A $9 million grant for poll worker training and voter education was put in place for the 2004 election cycle; counties spent nearly $8

million. Poll worker training is also an allowable expense under a $195 million voting system upgrade contract now being executed.)

Voter Education Program

(What is the requirement: Voters need to be advised of voting rights and other information on the electoral process.) (How has the state complied: California has led the nation in voter education efforts – with sample ballots, internet-access to information, a statewide voter information guide, a Voter Bill of Rights posted in polling places, as well as other information provided and posted at polling places. In addition, a $9 million grant for poll worker training and voter education was put in place for the 2004 election cycle; counties spent nearly $8 million. Poll worker training is also an allowable expense under a $195 million voting system upgrade contract now being executed.) (HAVA Section 302(a)(2)) (pg 105) (Specific voter education requirements are:

• Sample ballot (CA provides) • Information re date of election and polling place hours (CA provides) • Instructions on how to vote; including provisionally (CA provides) • Instructions for first-time voters with mail-in registrtion (CA provides) • General information on voting rights (CA provides) • General information on acts of fraud and misrepresentation (CA provides))

Some California Counties are Working Toward Compliance with the Following HAVA Provision:

Ensure the Every Polling Place has at Least One “Accessible” Voting Machine • This provision, in conjunction with the new California law that requires a Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT)

continues to be a work in progress. • The Secretary of State’s Office continues to encourage voting system vendors to submit applications for qualified voting

machines, as soon as possible. • Once applications are submitted, the Secretary of State’s Office reviews applications quickly and thoroughly.

VOTING SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS Any new voting system to be considered for certification for use in California elections will be required to have the following features:

1. An application that includes proof of federal certification, (i.e. copies of the United States Election Assistance Commission [EAC] approved Independent Testing Authority [ITA] reports and certification number issued by the EAC).

2. All applications must include full documentation, including technical and operational specifications, operating and maintenance manuals, training materials, and copies of all promotional materials from the vendor.

3. Each system must have comprehensive use procedures applicable for use of the system in California elections in conformance with state law and Secretary of State guidelines for voting system use procedures.

4. Each vendor must establish a California County User Group and hold at least one annual meeting where all California users and Secretary of State staff are invited to attend and review the system and ensure voter accessibility.

5. In addition to depositing the source code in an approved escrow facility, each vendor must deposit a copy of the system source code and binary executables with the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State reserves the right to perform a full independent review of the source code.

6. Voting system vendors shall provide to the Secretary of State, on request, a working version of the components, including all hardware, software and firmware, of the voting system that is proposed for use in an election, for the purposes of analysis and testing. These components shall be maintained in working order by the vendor.

7. Multiple independently tested and certified voting systems may be used together to meet federal and state requirements so long as their interface is limited to exchange of aggregated vote totals and/or ballot layout.

8. Components of a certified voting system may not be combined with components of a previously but separately certified system without certification by the Secretary of State as an entirely new system.

9. The vendor for each system that utilizes paper ballots will be required to provide printing specifications for those ballots to the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State will certify printers to print ballots for each system based upon their demonstrated ability to do so. Vendors may not require exclusivity in ballot printing and must cooperate fully in certification testing of ballots produced by other ballot printers.

10. All systems will be subject to volume testing as defined by established Secretary of State standards prior to certification in California.

District of Columbia The District is implementing changes in our registration system to allow for the electronic transmission of voter registration information from both the DMV and from our largest public assistance agency. This change will significantly reduce the level of data errors and streamline the registration process.

As a part of this process, we have conducted a major cleanup of our registration data. We have purchased software that will allow us to compare data easily with other city agencies. Under our State Plan, if possible, we are required to provide an electronic link to NVRA public assistance agencies. In the process of investigating whether such links are possible, we have also retrained these agencies to ensure that they are offering clients the opportunity to vote. The District implemented a dual voting system that combines optical scan and DRE system. For the first time, blind voters can vote without assistance. At the same time, we have been able to reduce our voter error rate by scanning ballots at the precinct prior to counting. One issue that has arisen as a result of the new system, is creating mechanism for accounting for votes on two different systems. We developed a new form and will test it with pollworkers in the near future. In the wake of implementing new changes, the District contracted with IFES to revamp our pollworker training. We overhauled the manual and all the polling place materials. Having a pool of well-trained pollworkers is critical and we have hired a recruiter to ensure we have sufficient numbers, including more bilingual pollworkers. Following implementation of the new voting system, the District created a new polling place position – the precinct technician. These pollworkers are responsible for troubleshooting and providing voter instruction on use of the DRE. Using our HHS funds, we have made a commitment to recruit voters with disabilities to serve as pollworkers. On February 1, we will be receiving the first copies of our candidate’s guide – that is, our guide to ballot access – in an accessible format. We are also going to be producing a guide to voter registration, a guide to using the new accessible machines and a voter’s guide in accessible formats. In April we will be conducting a focus group with voters with disabilities to select visual aids and other tools to enhance accessibility of the voting process. Last month, we purchased doorbells so that in those polling places with heavy doors or problematic door handles, voters can get assistance to entering the polls. Lastly, we consolidated the various signs that had been posted at the polling place into one sign. This is a standalone banner that we position at the entrance to the polling place. The cost for purchasing this attractive banner was the same as the cost of printing the five or so posters. Florida Florida is proud of its successes implementing the provisions of the federal Help America Vote Act. The funds received from the Election Assistance Commission have provided the State with the ability to meet the requirements of HAVA and to provide funds to counties to enhance many of their election programs. Florida’s most challenging endeavor was the implementation of a statewide voter registration system. The development of the Florida Voter Registration System (FVRS) began in 2003 and is a superb example of collaboration between private and public sectors as well as between multiple levels of government. The Department actively sought and received participation from each of the 67 Supervisors of Elections and their staffs. Florida’s unique approach for meeting the HAVA requirements relied heavily upon the input and cooperation of the county voter registration vendors who were responsible for completing modifications to the county systems. Directly supporting the Department’s development efforts were IBM serving as the prime contractor and systems integrator and MAXIMUS providing project management and quality assurance service. Finally, to insure full participation of all stakeholders, set policy, and provide guidance to the development effort, the Secretary of State appointed an executive steering committee comprised of representatives from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, Supervisors of Elections, and the Department of State. Fundamental to the FVRS design was the retention of our county voter registration systems. These systems will continue to function as independent applications that communicate in real-time with the FVRS over a dedicated private network installed and managed by the Department of State. County systems will interact with the FVRS through a standard interface based on current Service Oriented Architecture and WEB services. The project architects and planners of the FVRS consider the benefits of this approach to include:

• Minimal disruption and change to county operations and procedures, • Retention of local administration of voter registration functions, • Distribution of technology resources across state and county managed systems, • Scalability to meet wide fluctuations in demand, • Flexibility to meet future state and county requirements FVRS was fully operational as of January 3, 2006 with all 67 counties and within its authorized budget. Florida has three vendors of voting systems that have been certified as meeting the HAVA requirements. The vendors are Election Systems and Software (ES&S), Diebold Election Systems, Inc., and Sequoia Voting Systems, Inc. Counties in Florida are able to choose their own systems, so long as they are certified by the state. Fifteen of Florida’s counties have used all touch screen voting systems at polling places since 2002 and thus have experience using the disability compliant equipment. The remaining fifty-two counties have used precinct based optical scan systems. These counties are now integrating disability compliant equipment into their systems for use in the 2006 elections. Funding received as a result of HAVA has enabled the State to enhance many of its programs. In addition to developing the Florida Voter Registration System and establishing a new bureau in the Division of Elections to provide voter registration services, the funding has allowed the Department to contract with a consulting firm to provide assistance to the Supervisors of Elections regarding polling place accessibility and voting equipment accessibility for persons with disabilities. In addition, the Department of State has recently contracted with one of its state universities to develop a curriculum for training poll workers that will be distributed to all 67 counties in order to provide uniform poll worker training throughout the state. We anticipate that this curriculum will be ready for distribution in time to train poll workers for the 2006 primary and general elections. To enhance poll worker training, the Department has developed a video relating to conflict management procedures and has purchased a video regarding sensitivity training relating to individuals with disabilities. These videos are being updated for the 2006 elections. One of the major voter education efforts of the Department involved contracting with the Get Out the Vote Foundation (GOTV), a non-profit arm of the Florida State Association of Supervisors of Elections. The contract provided funds to coordinate an extensive campaign to educate and inform voters on the use of touch screen voting systems. The partnership with GOTV also included a statewide voter education campaign to encourage people to register and to vote. The effort included information that could be used by all Supervisors of Elections to provide a unified statewide message to all of Florida’s voters. Funding from HAVA has been distributed to the 67 county Supervisors of Elections to assist them with various elections activities. Approximately $18.5 million has been provided to counties to assist them with or reimburse them for purchasing voting systems that are accessible to persons with disabilities. Florida has utilized $8.8 million for voter education programs on the local level. These funds have been distributed to Florida’s Supervisors of Elections to provide additional assistance for voter education efforts in each county. Florida required each county to provide a 15% county match for the voter education funds. Based on reports received from the counties, they have been able to increase the voter education services being provided and have broadened the types of activities being conducted to include creative and innovative approaches to generating public interest in the elections process. The voter education funding has allowed most counties to be able to mail sample ballots to voters prior to each election. Many of the counties are now customizing the sample ballots for each precinct and are receiving positive feedback from the voters on this effort. In addition, the voter education funds are used by counties to enhance their outreach programs, voter registration drives, voting systems demonstrations, media presence, and web sites. Many counties provide extensive information on their web sites to assist voters. The more popular features on web sites are precinct finders, absentee ballot information and important dates. In addition, many counties post precinct directions, early voting information, absentee ballot requests, voting machine demonstrations, voters guides, election night returns, and poll worker request forms. Florida’s successes have been realized by the voters. In a survey of voters conducted by the Collins Center for Public Policy following the 2004 general election, voters were asked to rate the polling place, the poll workers, their supervisor of elections and their confidence that their votes count. Enhanced poll worker training efforts by the Supervisors of Elections resulted in 87% of the respondents indicating the job poll workers did on election day was excellent-good. Ease of voting machine use was rated excellent-good by 83% of the respondents. The overall job done by Supervisors of Elections was rated excellent-good by 86% of the respondents and 85% were confident that their vote would count. Florida has had major changes since the 2000 elections and we are proud of the continued successes that we have realized. Georgia

Georgia has successfully met all requirements of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA). Below is a brief synopsis of the implementation of the main components of HAVA: Voting System Standards sec 301 Georgia implemented a statewide uniform voting system in November of 2002. This system is comprised of touch screen electronic voting units deployed in each of Georgia’s 159 counties. The state of Georgia originally purchased approximately 20,000 units, all of which provide a voter with disabilities the opportunity to access and vote their ballot independently. To date over 1,000 independent elections have been successfully conducted using this new electronic voting platform. Provisional Voting Requirements sec 302 The Georgia General Assembly established provisional voting during the 2002 legislative session. Upon the passage of HAVA in October 2002, the General Assembly passed Senate Bill 258 during the 2003 legislative session, which was referred to as Georgia’s HAVA legislation. Included in this legislation were minor modifications to the existing provisional voting statute, so that Georgia’s law was in complete compliance with HAVA mandates. Statewide Voter Registration sec 303 Georgia first implemented a statewide voter registration system upon the passage of the National Voter Registration Act in 1994. The system, which became operational in 1995, is what is now referred to as a “Top Down” system and provides real-time access for all of Georgia’s 159 county registration offices. After the passage of HAVA, a few minor modifications were made to the existing system to assist county registration offices in collecting and maintaining data related to UOCAVA voters, first time registrants and provisional voters. Beginning with the 2006 General Primary election, Georgia will install electronic poll books at each of its 3,000 polling locations. These electronic poll books will contain the voter registration database for the entire state. Should a voter present them self at the wrong polling site the poll workers will be able to quickly lookup the voter’s record and direct them to the correct polling place without delay. The implementation of electronic poll books provides a critical bridge to improving and streamlining the voting process for voters and election officials. Voter Registration Form Revisions & ID Requirements for First Time Registrants sec 303 Georgia’s Senate Bill 258 (HAVA legislation) provided that all first time registrants by mail must provide one of the HAVA forms of identification prior to casting a ballot. The state voter registration application was revised to include a “pocket” on the form which allowed a voter to forward a copy of the appropriate identification along with the application to the Voter Registrar. While Georgia’s voter registration application required a voter to affirm under oath that he or she was a U.S. citizen and was 18 years of age on or before Election Day, the voter registration form was revised to include the citizenship and age language questions in the format required by HAVA. Polling Place Accessibility sec 261 Georgia has applied for each appropriation of funding provided by HAVA for the purpose of improving accessibility for voters with disabilities. To date the funds have been used to provide grants to local county election officials for polling place upgrades, voter education, and other enhancements designed to improve accessibility for voters with disabilities. The Secretary of State’s office also supplied “Accessibility Kits” to local election officials for each of Georgia’s 3,000 polling sites. These kits contained items designed to assist voters in accessing their polling location and completing the process of casting a ballot at the polling place or absentee balloting location. Definition of a Vote, UOCAVA Requirements, Administrative Complaint Procedure & Uniform Absentee Balloting Instructions secs 301, 402 and 701 Georgia implemented all of the above HAVA requirements through either rule or legislation. Indiana In January 2003, as his first official act as Indiana Secretary of State, Todd Rokita brought together a group of election administrators, legislators, local government officials, and community leaders to form the tri-partisan Vote Indiana Team. The group met for six months and developed the Indiana State Plan for Implementing the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (State Plan). The State Plan constitutes Indiana's road map for HAVA implementation and election reform for the foreseeable future. The State Plan will help guide election administrators across Indiana in their efforts to implement HAVA and continue to provide free and fair elections for all Hoosiers.

The State Plan addresses a number of election administration issues. This document will serve as a status update on Indiana's progress in implementing its State Plan and complying with HAVA. Each section below relates to Indiana’s progress with respect to specific aspects of the State Plan, HAVA, and Indiana statute. Statewide Voter Registration System (SVRS) In the fall of 2003, Indiana started its work in developing a single, uniform, centralized voter registration database. The Secretary of State and Election Division sought input from future county users from the inception of the project. A list of slightly over 100 requirements grew to over 350. Without the unique partnership between the counties and state, such a detailed and comprehensive plan may not have been possible. Each county, from the smallest to the largest, was given a number of opportunities to make their voices heard and desires a reality. The continued leadership of the Secretary of State, Election Division, and SVRS Steering Committee helped guide the states selected vendor to provide the solution that would ensure success. Throughout the development of the system, requirements were altered, plans changed, and a better product realized. Each county represented on the Steering Committee was asked to serve as a pilot county for the project. Several other counties of varying size and differing situations were also asked to assist in testing the system as a pilot county. The hard work and perseverance of these counties helped identify areas needing further deliberation and attention. The growing pains experienced during the project pilot phase helped establish a more robust and polished system. Throughout the summer of 2005, small groups of counties were being introduced and trained to use the new system. At the same time, the state's project management team and the system's development team began to purchase and deploy the hardware and connectivity necessary to implement a compliant system. On November 28, 2005, Indiana's final remaining county began using the system, ensuring Indiana's compliance with HAVA's requirement more than a month before the federal deadline. During the time leading up to the May 2006 Primary Election, and for a short period thereafter, additional changes will be made to the system intended to increase user productivity and accountability. Voting Machines When developing the State Plan, there was a fair amount of discussion on who would buy the voting machines to replace existing punch card and lever machine voting systems and accessible machines for the disabled. The two alternatives were: the Secretary of State or the counties. The Vote Indiana Team wrestled with this decision. With a significant amount of county support and compelling claims, it was determined that the counties should choose the voting system and vendor. The claims: "what works in one county, may not work in another", and "we know what suits our county best"; were a driving force behind this decision. However, with this decision came a big responsibility for the counties. The counties would have to negotiate with vendors to provide a system that complied with state and federal laws and qualified for reimbursement within the reimbursement limits set forth in the State Plan. The State Plan separated counties into two groups: Tier A and Tier B. Tier A counties are those with qualifying precincts that used punch card or lever machine voting systems in 2000. Tier B consisted of all remaining counties. Under the State Plan, each Tier A county was qualified to receive up to $8,000 per precinct and each Tier B county was qualified to receive up to $4,000 per precinct. In addition to these amounts, each county was entitled to receive up to $50,000 as reimbursement for the purchase of voting system software. In the summer of 2003, a reimbursement application was developed and counties started to apply late that year. The first round of Section 102 reimbursements occurred in January 2004. Later that summer, Title III reimbursements were also made. Throughout 2004 and 2005, counties purchased new voting equipment to comply with federal and state laws and reimbursements were made. In the spring of 2005, the last lever machine county replaced its system with a Direct Record Electronic (DRE) voting system. In October 2005, the last of the punch card counties replaced its system. Therefore, Indiana met the HAVA compliance deadline for the replacement of punch card and lever machine voting systems. Since the punch card and lever machine milestone was met, Indiana has concentrated its effort on ensuring that counties provide accessible voting machines. With the leadership of the Circuit Court Clerks and their dedicated election deputies, all counties completed negotiations of the terms and entered into contracts for voting machines with their selected vendors. All counties are expected to take possession of the accessible voting equipment by March of 2006, prior to Indiana’s May primary elections. Voting Machine Stats:

Greene County was the last Lever Machine County, replaced spring 2005 Porter County was the last Punch Card Machine, replaced October 2005 $40 million HAVA dollars budgeted for machine replacement Approximately $35 million will be spent by 2006 on new machines Counties have saved $5 million through negotiating deals Approximately 75% of the money set aside in the State Plan for voting systems has been provided to the counties as

reimbursement for voting system purchases

60% of voters will use DRE voting as their primary voting system 40% of voters will use optical scan as their primary voting system Microvote, an Indiana company, has voting systems installed in 45 counties ES&S machines are in 27 counties Diebold machines are in 15 counties VTI machines are in 5 counties

Polling Place Accessibility In 2003, per the recommendation of the State Plan, the Indiana Secretary of State formed a partnership with the Indiana Governor's Council for People with Disabilities to survey each polling place in the state of Indiana. The surveys were conducted during elections and were conducted by individuals with disabilities. Indiana was one of only two states to survey polling places during elections using volunteers with disabilities. The first survey was conducted during the 2003 Municipal Election in the City of Indianapolis, which happens to contain all of Marion County. Surveys were conducted in 42 counties on the 2004 Primary Election day and in 41 counties on the 2004 General Election day. Data obtained from the survey was forwarded to county leaders. This data provided election administrators with the knowledge needed to make upgrades or changes to inaccessible polling places. Many of the problems faced in most polling places are few and minor. After studying the data, the Secretary of State and the Election Division developed an application available to each county for items to be purchased in bulk by the state. These items were funded through the US Health and Human Services' Polling Place Accessibility Grant to be delivered to each county in order to make upgrades necessary for accessibility compliance. The state is in the final stages of procurement and intends to have these items in each county by March 2006, prior to Indiana’s May primary elections. In most cases, these items will be used as temporary Election Day upgrades. Although currently Indiana has no specific statistics, some of the 5,500 polling places used in Indiana’s last election will have to be moved or consolidated in order to achieve HAVA-compliant accessibility. In any event, Indiana expects HAVA compliance with respect to polling place accessibility to be achieved by the counties. Iowa

Voting Registration System All 99 Iowa counties were using a single, uniform centralized voter registration system prior to January 1, 2006. Counties were a partner in this process from the development of RFP requirements to developing the system. The state has committed to make the operation of the system a partnership between the counties and Secretary of State with the counties providing extensive input into the operation and enhancements to the system through a Customer Advisory Council.

Voting Systems As of December 31, 2005, all 99 counties had entered into agreements for state certified voting systems that met the 2002 Voting System Standards and had been state certified. HAVA funds funded a significant portion of the purchases. Early estimates indicate HAVA funds funded about 75% of the total purchase with individual counties ranging from over 100% to 50%. Counties were allowed to purchase any certified system.

Accessible Polling Places With a strong partnership between the Secretary of State’s Office, counties, and disability organizations over 99% of the state’s polling places are accessible. The partners continue to work toward the goal of making all polling places being accessible.

Training and Education of Election Officials and Poll Workers • The Secretary of State, Iowa Association of Counties, and Iowa Association of County Auditors are completing negotiations

to create a long term entity responsible for training election officials and poll workers through 2009. • SEAT (State Election Administrator Training) program which was started prior to HAVA, has been funded and expanded

with HAVA funds since 2003. The 40 hour certification has been obtained by 207 administrators, with 95% of counties participating. A continuation education component is in place.

• A Poll Worker Certification program has been established. Currently state and local election officials are developing a 6 hour program to certify poll workers. The program will be available in multiple formats including in person instruction or computer-based. The auditors and Secretary of State have set a goal of having 1 certified poll worker in each of the over 1800 precincts by the 2008 General Election and having at least 700 certified by the 2006 General Election.

Kansas 1. Voter registration system Kansas met the December 31, 2005 deadline for implementation of a computerized statewide voter registration system. The last of 105 counties went live on December 29. Dozens of local elections have already been conducted using the new system. All of the additional major state requirements for the system (the parts not required by HAVA) are on schedule to be implemented before the state primary on August 1. 2. Voting equipment Orders have been placed for all the counties’ HAVA-compliant voting equipment and are scheduled for delivery and installation at least 120 days before the state primary. We managed the RFP process and signed contracts with five vendors within a nine month time span. Counties were given options to choose the vendor and type of equipment that best fits their needs. 3. Administrative complaints To date we have received no administrative complaints filed since the formal complaint procedure was established in early 2004. This is partly due to the tremendous improvement in polling place accessibility that has been accomplished by the counties. 4. State-county partnership Early in the HAVA planning process we set a policy of involving county election officers as much as possible in planning and setting the requirements for various aspects of HAVA because they are the end users in most aspects of election administration and because we at the state level do not presume to know all the answers. This approach resulted in a number of work groups, task forces and committees, numerous interminable meetings, and some frustrations along the way. But we think it has proved to be the right way to do things and has produced the best results. Our county election officers have recognized this and thanked the SOS office for the opportunity to help chart their own course. Kentucky The Commonwealth of Kentucky has been meticulous in developing and implementing policy and practices compliant with the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA). Statewide Voter Registration Database

• The commonwealth’s statewide voter registration database is HAVA compliant, and was one of two models used in developing the requirements in HAVA

Voting Equipment Purchases paid for with HAVA Funds

• 9 counties have new DRE voting equipment to replace the lever equipment they used in the 2000 elections • 120 counties have new handicap accessible DRE voting equipment for each voting precinct • 120 counties have new optical scan absentee voting systems

New Programs Utilizing our Statewide Voter Registration Database paid for with HAVA Funds

• “Voter Information Center” on our website allows anyone to find out if they are registered to vote, their residential street address listed on the database, the location, map, and driving directions to their voting precinct, and their statewide elected officials for their area

• “Provisional Voter Information” on our website allows a person who voted a provisional ballot to enter the required information and learn if their ballot counted and if not, the reason why.

• “State Board of Elections Voter Verification System” is an interactive-voice-response system using a 1-800 phone number for poll workers to use in verifying the eligibility of potential voters on election day. This is another tool for poll workers to use in verifying a voter’s registration if the voter is not listed in the precinct roster. The poll worker then allows the person to vote or directs the voter to the proper precinct or the county clerk’s office or allows them to vote using a provisional ballot.

• An election management component to our statewide database is under construction. Louisiana Background The Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA), a landmark federal law drafted after the 2000 presidential election mandated some reforms to improve voting system technology and election administration procedures. HAVA gives the states responsibility for fulfilling a long list of mandates. The deadline for implementing the statewide voter registration database and disabled-accessible voting equipment was January 1, 2006.

For more than four years, Secretary Ater and the late Secretary McKeithen have worked with election officials statewide to modernize the way we vote in Louisiana. Thanks to their efforts, Louisiana has already implemented major election reforms such as provisional voting for federal elections and early voting.

Statewide Voter Registration Database Unlike most states, Louisiana has had a statewide voter registration database since 1987. Modifications have been made to make Louisiana’s statewide voter registration system compliant with the provisions of HAVA. Louisiana’s database has streamlined election administration. Every state and parish election official is able to immediately access the voter registration database from anywhere in Louisiana. An interagency agreement was entered into with the Louisiana Department of State and the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections and approved on November 1, 2005 to verify registration information as required by HAVA. In addition, a requisite User Agreement for voter registration information verification system services between the Louisiana Motor Vehicle Administration and the Social Security Administration system that would allow Louisiana to verify social security information was approved on December 12, 2005. Louisiana has received $47,330,777 in federal dollars to help fund HAVA’s mandates. Louisiana allocated 3.3 percent of the federal funds in its State Plan to update the statewide voter registration system. In a recent survey of 27 states, the National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS) found that more than half of those states will spend up to 40 percent of their HAVA funds developing, implementing, and maintaining their databases. One in five states will spend as much as 70 percent. Louisiana is updating its system in-house and has also contracted with an outside vendor to assist the department in the development of a web-based system. A total of 28 states are utilizing the services of a vendor to assist in the development of a statewide voter registration system, according to national figures obtained by Electionline.org. Louisiana’s system is a top-down system. That means the state’s parish registrars of voters will enter their data into a single, interactive system that can be used statewide. Also according to Electionline.org, 38 states have top-down systems, six have bottom-up systems, two have hybrid databases, and four are either still developing their systems or do not require voters to register.

Modernizing Voting Equipment Louisiana certified voting systems for six vendors for use in Louisiana. On August 9, 2005, a request for proposal was issued to six vendors for the procurement of a new statewide voting system. On October 31, 2005, Louisiana announced that Sequoia Voting Systems, Inc. was selected to replace all lever-operated voting machines with AVC Advantage voting units. On December 13, 2005, the Louisiana Department of State entered into a contract with Sequoia Voting Systems, Inc., and all HAVA compliant AVC Advantage voting units are presently being installed for use in various parishes to replace lever-operated voting machines. Under the provisions of HAVA, every polling place is required to have at least one accessible voting system. When Louisiana issued its State Plan, Louisiana proposed to have at least one accessible voting system in every precinct in the state. Louisiana’s new statewide voting system will include all accessible voting units in every precinct. All absentee/early voting systems for voting early in person were accessible to individuals with disabilities through the procurement of the iVotronic Touch Screen voting systems in Fiscal Years 2003 and 2004, meeting the January 1, 2006 deadline. Louisiana’s new statewide voting system will now include AVC Edge Touch Screen Voting Units for early voting, which are accessible to individuals with disabilities. For absentee voting by mail, Louisiana uses paper ballots which are read through paper ballot optical scanning machines. Louisiana will spend $31,095,394 or 65.7 percent, of our HAVA dollars on new electronic voting systems purchases. Close to 40 percent of the NASS survey participants reported that their state will also spend 50 percent or more of election reform money on voting equipment.

Key Facts

Louisiana had 2,796,551 registered voters in November of 2000. In November of 2004, Louisiana’s voter registration rolls increased by 126,844 for a total of 2,923,395 registered voters.

1,776,133 Louisiana voters cast ballots in the 2000 presidential election. 1,956,673 Louisiana voters participated in the 2004 presidential election, for an increase of 180,540.

63.5 percent of eligible Louisiana voters participated in the 2000 presidential election, compared to 59.5 percent nationwide according to U.S. Census Bureau figures. In 2004, 66.9 percent of Louisiana’s eligible voters voted, compared to 63.8 percent nationwide.

Louisiana’s turnout rate for 2004 was ranked 30th nationwide, according to the U.S. Bureau of the Census.

Louisiana received $47,330,777 in federal funding to comply with HAVA. In addition, interest has accrued on the funds that has been received and deposited into special HAVA accounts in the Louisiana Department of the Treasury.

Louisiana has been awarded three federal grants totaling $433,476 from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families in order to comply with Title II, Subtitle D, Part 2, Section 261of The Help America Vote Act of 2002 to ensure access for individuals with disabilities.

Louisiana used four different types of election day voting equipment in 2004, including: electronic AVC Advantage, lever AVM-POM (40), lever AVM-POM (50), and electronic iVotronics. By the fall of 2006, Louisiana will use only the electronic AVC Advantage Full Faced DRE Voting Units for election day voting which will all be accessible to individuals with disabilities.

The Department of State has completed the following election reforms since HAVA passed in 2002: o Louisiana allows provisional voting by voters for federal elections only. Currently, voters who vote by provisional

ballot can verify if their votes were counted by calling a toll free number and giving specific voter information. In the future, voters will be able to access this information online through the Department of State.

o Effective January 1, 2006, all Louisiana voters can vote early in person at the parish registrar of voters’ office without having to provide a reason for voting early.

o Louisiana will have a state of the art web page to assist voters in Louisiana with information on their voting rights, registering to vote, and voting. In addition, voters will be able to retrieve the location of their polling place online.

o Louisiana’s statewide voter registration system will be verified against state death records, state records for felony convictions, national change of address list, the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections, and the Social Security Administration through the Louisiana Motor Vehicle Administration, to guarantee that only voters who are eligible to vote are registered in Louisiana.

Maryland

VOTING SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS Twenty-three of the twenty-four counties implemented a HAVA-compliant voting system for the 2004 elections. The remaining jurisdiction – Baltimore City – has its compliant voting system and will be using it in the 2006 elections. Maryland has implemented the Diebold AccuVote-TS voting system statewide, and this system meets the voting system and accessibility (disability and language) requirements established by § 301(a).

VOTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM As of December 28, 2005, the State of Maryland had implemented a HAVA-compliant voter registration system in all twenty-four jurisdictions. The compliant system, developed Saber Consulting, Inc. of Salem, Oregon and referred to as MDVOTERS, meets the HAVA requirements because the system:

• With input from the local boards of elections, was defined and is being maintained and administered by the State’s chief election official;

• Is a single voter registration list centralized at the State level; • Contains the name and registration of every legally registered voter in the State; • Serves as the official voter registration list for all elections in Maryland; • Provides immediate electronic access by local election officials; and • Is coordinated with other agency databases in Maryland, including Motor Vehicle Administration’s driver’s license system.

The system also includes a real-time interface with Maryland’s Motor Vehicle Administration (MVA). Upon entering a driver’s license number, a query is generated and sent to MVA’s live driver’s license database to verify the applicant’s driver’s license number. A response to the verification query is provided within three seconds, and the MDVOTERS user can continue with processing the application. Seven committees comprised of State and local election officials drove the implementation process. (The committees were Executive Steering, Standards, Configuration Management, Reports, User Acceptance Testing, Security and Technology, and Organizational Change Management.) These committees developed and approved system specifications, completed significant system testing, and validated new business processes needed to implement the HAVA-compliant system. The State contracted with InfoSentry to assist with evaluating the responses to the Request for Proposals, perform independent validation and verification, develop system-wide performance testing, and perform quality assurance on the software development and data conversion. Now that the HAVA-required specifications have been implemented, Phase 2 of the implementation has begun. This phase includes implementing non-HAVA required system specifications (i.e., provisional voting, election judge, petition, and absentee modules), making approved customizations requested by the local boards of elections, enhancing the system’s current functionality, and restructuring of various processes for each LBE. Regional Change Control Boards will lead this phase by evaluating, approving and prioritizing customization requests.

PROVISIONAL VOTING Provisional voting as required by HAVA was implemented during the 2004 elections. Maryland’s Election Law Article and the relevant regulations have been revised to accommodate provisional voting as required by the Act. A State-level, free access system was implemented in the 2004 elections. Recent statutory changes require that, if a voter casts a provisional ballot in a precinct other than the voter’s home precinct, all contests for which the voter is eligible to vote are to be counted. IDENTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS The necessary amendments to the State’s regulations have been amended to reflect the identification requirements for voters who register to vote by mail after January 1, 2003, and will be voting for the first time in Maryland after January 1, 2004. These voters will be required to present identification before voting a regular ballot at the polling place or having their ballot canvassed. The implementation of the HAVA-compliant voter registration system means that many of these voters will have satisfied the identification requirement during the registration process and will not need to provide identification on Election Day. For those voters who do not satisfy the identification requirements prior to Election Day, information is provided to election judges during their training and in the manual.

VOTING INFORMATION The information required by HAVA was included in the polling place signage used during the 2004 elections. VOTER REGISTRATION APPLICATION (VRA) The statewide VRA includes the citizenship and age question. The compliant VRA asks for an affirmative response to the applicant’s citizenship and age and has a place for the applicant to write his/her driver’s license or MVA identification number or, if the voter has not been issued a driver’s license or MVA identification number, at least the last four number of the applicant’s social security number. The instructions also include information about the identification requirements for first-time voters who register to vote by mail. A graphic design firm in Maryland (BlueWater Agency) is current reviewing the VRA and will be making suggestions to improvement the application’s design and enhance its usability.

GRIEVANCE SYSTEM Regulations have been adopted to accommodate the grievance system required by HAVA. There were 4 administrative complaint hearings during the 2004 election cycle and several complaints in which the complainants did not request a hearing were received. IMPROVEMENT OF ELECTION ADMINISTRATION In addition to the specific requirements outlined by HAVA, Maryland has undertaken the following activities and projects to improve election administration.

• Established the National Center for the Study of Elections (NCSE) at the University of Maryland Baltimore County (UMBC) to use the academic and research capabilities of UMBC to apply expert analysis, study, and educational techniques to the various programs at the State Board of Elections.

• Redesign of election judges’ manual using graphic design techniques. • Development of a standard, statewide election judges’ training curriculum for use during the 2006 elections. • On-line polling place locater to allow individuals to determine whether they are registered to vote, where their polling place is,

whether the polling place is accessible, and the candidates and questions on their ballot in the upcoming election. • Extensive voter outreach and education campaign to educate the public about the HAVA-compliant voting system. • Commissioned two institutions in the University of Maryland System to conduct a technical and usability study of vote

verification systems. • On-line election judges’ tutorial to supplement the election judges’ training and manual. This component of the election

judges’ training program is planned for 2008. Michigan Enclosed are brief updates of HAVA successes for the State of Michigan as of January 2006. Additional HAVA related accomplishments can be found at the end of the Michigan HAVA State Plan at www.michigan.gov/hava. HAVA-Related Purchase of Statewide Voting Systems In calendar year 2005, the Bureau of Elections completed the replacement of all punch card, lever machine and manual paper voting systems with optical scan voting systems. In addition, the Bureau replaced all remaining Direct Recording Electronic (DRE), Central Count Optical Scan and out dated optical scan systems with new optical scan systems. The Bureau of Elections is currently reviewing reimbursement requests from jurisdictions that purchased new optical scan voting systems after the 2000 presidential election.

The Bureau of Elections issued an Invitation to Bid (ITB) in the fall of 2005 to provide HAVA compliant accessible voting systems for every polling location in the state. Vendors submitted bids on January 17, 2006 which will be reviewed by a joint evaluation committee. For additional information pertaining to the ITB and the purchase of equipment please go to www.michigan.gov/hava. HAVA-Mandated Changes to Qualified Voter File (QVF) System The Michigan Qualified Voter File achieved HAVA compliance with the completion of the voter identity verification process. Mail-in registrants identified are verified by matching the last four digits of their Social Security number against the Social Security Administration (SSA) database. The Department of State (acting in its capacity as motor vehicle administrator) contracted with AAMVA and SSA to provide this capability. All programming is complete and the SSA database provides verification. Digitized Signature Project A Bureau of Elections project would allow the Qualified Voter File system to make use of digitized signatures maintained in the Michigan driver license system. Using digitized signatures in the QVF will allow system users to easily verify signatures on absentee ballot applications and petitions. It will ultimately eliminate the need for most hardcopy voter registration applications. The Bureau of Elections has created a process to move approximately 7,000,000 signatures from the driver license system to the corresponding voter records in the QVF system. A gradual implementation will begin in 2006. QVF Access Options for Smaller Jurisdictions The Bureau of Elections is using funds made available under HAVA to prepare a second version of the QVF designed for municipalities that have fewer than 5,000 voters. The second version will require less computer resource while maintaining significant functionality. This new software will allow the QVF to be extended to virtually any jurisdiction that meets minimum system specifications. We expect to complete the beta testing phase of this product during late spring, allowing the product to become available during the summer of 2006. Michigan Voter Registration Center

Using funding made available under HAVA, the Bureau of Elections designed the Michigan Voter Information Center (MVIC) as an easy to use, Web-based source for a variety of information on Michigan elections and the State election process. This Web site lets people find election information quickly and easily. Visitors to the Web site can find requirements for voting in Michigan, Michigan Election Law, and links to other election-related information. For Michigan registered voters, this site even provides registration status and the address of their polling location. A map to the polling site is also provided. The project soon will expand services to include online ballot information for statewide elections.

QVF Equipment Upgrade The Bureau of Elections upgraded the main file server that is the heart of the Michigan QVF. This provides the infrastructure needed to house digitized signatures captured by the state’s driver license system. The new server incorporates numerous technological improvements made in recent years and provides a higher level of security than previously available. This upgrade will position both the Bureau of Elections and Michigan’s local election officials well for the 2006 cycle. In addition, the Bureau of Elections is replacing QVF computer equipment used by local units of government to manage voter registration. The new equipment is more powerful and robust compared to the existing equipment and will allow local election officials to access digitized signatures from the driver license system. All the equipment is expected to be in place by the end of Spring 2006. Purchase of Social Security Death Records Using funding made available under HAVA, the Bureau of Elections purchased a nationwide database of deceased individuals from the Social Security Administration. The records were purchased to match them against the QVF database to identify voters who may be deceased. The Bureau will continue purchasing Social Security information to supplement and speed up the processes already in place to identify and cancel deceased voters. The process will improve the accuracy of the QVF database and help ensure the integrity of the electoral process. Provisional Balloting Michigan election law was amended under PA 92 of 2004 to authorize "provisional" balloting for all elections. To implement the process, a convenient, easy to use four-step procedure form was developed and distributed to Michigan election officials. Additional procedures were developed and distributed to direct Michigan election officials on 1) the procedures for determining the validity of "provisional" ballots not counted on election day 2) establishing a "free access system" to notify voters who cast a provisional ballot of the disposition of their ballots and 3) tracking and compiling data on the "provisional" balloting process. All procedures and materials were posted on the Bureau's Web site for easy access by Michigan's election officials and voters.

Voter ID Card Reimbursement Grant Program The Bureau of Elections is sponsoring a Voter ID Card Reimbursement Grant Program. It allows county, city and township clerks to recover the costs associated with the issuance of voter ID cards to people who experienced a polling place location change in the fall of 2005 due to the implementation of Michigan's new "consolidated elections" laws. Election officials who wish to participate in the

program must use the voter ID cards which were returned as "undeliverable" by the U.S. Postal Service for voter registration list maintenance purposes. As of January 2006, 690 of Michigan's 1,516 cities and townships are participating in the program. The program will result in the cancellation of thousands of obsolete voter registration records throughout the state. The grant program is funded through HAVA. Polling Place Accessibility Program The Bureau of Elections is sponsoring a Polling Place Accessibility Program to help ensure that all of the buildings used as polling places throughout the state are fully compliant with the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Eligible cities and townships that need to make accessibility improvements in buildings used as polling places can obtain financial assistance under the program to pay for the needed upgrades. The grant program is funded through HAVA. Mississippi SEMS

1. On January 31, 2006, completed Statewide Election Management System installation in thirteen months. This included a one month delay due to the impact of Katrina on several coastal counties. Assistance and system service calls will continue through 2010. Some of the tools/techniques that facilitated this effort were:

a. Early and continued involvement of local election officials in setting standards for system performance, incorporation of state law and local election experience.

b. Constant meetings to coordinate the effort of the numerous agencies, vendors and groups within the Secretary of State’s office.

c. Initial modification of State Statutes in 2004 to authorize the implementation of the statewide system. Voting Machines The Mississippi Secretary of State initiated a program to introduce a uniform, HAVA compliant voting system across the state. Seventy-seven (77) of eighty-two (82) counties chose to participate, or “opt-in”, to the statewide system. Presently, Mississippi is in the process of delivering voting systems to those 77 counties, in addition to scheduling training for election officials and pollworkers. The Secretary of State selected the Diebold TSX voting system after a thorough selection process beginning with twelve vendors of which three met the standards for demonstration testing. Tests were conducted before a group of election officials in a mock election environment. Participants included circuit clerks, election commissioners and citizens with disabilities. All three finalists were graded on system performance (75%) before bids (25%) were opened to ensure the best performing system was selected. The Diebold TSX voting system had the best scores for both performance and cost. Initially, the system did not have a Voter Verifiable Printer Audit Trail included. However, during the statewide demonstration of the system, public in such a safeguard led the Secretary of State to include the VVPAT as part of the system. Once again, early and continual involvement of the county election officials and members of the disability community as a focus group was crucial to ensuring the best system was selected while being critical to providing credibility to the process. The Mississippi Legislature incorporated the HAVA requirements into Mississippi Statutes in 2004 and 2005. This gave the Secretary of State the authority to use HAVA funds for a statewide system. A Legislative Action Committee composed of circuit clerks and election commissioners worked with the SOS staff to review and recommend modifications to state law that incorporated the DRE voting system. Continual meetings to guarantee communications were necessary with other agencies, vendors and groups within the Secretary of State’s office. Constant meetings to coordinate the statewide effort. Americans with Disability Accessibility A statewide survey of all voting precincts was conducted by each county using the DOJ standards. Based on this survey each county could judge the work required to meet ADA standards, the cost and whether it would be necessary to consolidate precincts. A grant program was established where each county could apply for HAVA/HHS funds to supplement the expense of making precincts ADA accessible. Those funds were allocated taking into consideration the 2000 census disabled population in each county. The Mississippi Coalition for Citizens with Disabilities was instrumental in completing this survey. Montana In order to implement the provisions of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), the Secretary of State's office initiated a punch card buyout, trained counties on the requirements for identification and provisional balloting, provided funding for precinct counters, arranged for paid advertisements regarding voters' new rights and responsibilities under HAVA, successfully encouraged the Legislature to adopt a paper ballot requirement for electronic voting systems, and purchased and contracted for training on a centralized statewide voter database and for voting equipment equipped for individuals with disabilities. Consistent with the above activities, the state's efforts have been particularly effective in the following areas:

Access for Individuals with Disabilities ♦ In partnership with the Montana Advocacy Program, the state co-sponsored a Voting System Vendor Fair last year to review

voting systems specifically equipped for individuals with disabilities. Attended by over 100 members of the disabled community and advocates as well as state and county election officials, the event garnered a great deal of praise. Individuals with disabilities completed in-depth surveys on their assessments of the systems, and the voting system that was ultimately purchased was the clear choice of those surveyed.

♦ The Secretary of State's office provided funding for the Montana Council on Developmental Disabilities to provide transportation to the polls on election day. The office also provided community-based organization grants to agencies that serve persons with disabilities to ensure that they could get the word out to their members and clients about accessibility.

♦ In recognition of the above efforts, Elaine Graveley, the state's Election Deputy, was honored with a Courage and Advocacy Award from the Montana Advocacy Program, Montana Council on Developmental Disabilities, and the University of Montana Rural Institute.

Identification

♦ Under a program called the Voter Verification Service, county election officials were able to verify driver’s license numbers given by people at the polling places as part of their form of identification. This was quite successful in reducing the number of provisional ballots.

♦ The Voter Verification Service is a result of an alliance between the state government and the private sector. It was cooperatively developed and is supported by the Secretary of State's office, the Department of Justice, the Department of Administration's Information Technology Services Division, and Montana Interactive, LLC.

♦ The Secretary of State’s Voter Verification Service was selected for the Council of State Governments' Innovations Awards Program and was featured in the November/December edition of State News magazine.

Voter and Election Official Education Programs

♦ The Secretary of State provided grants of $5,000 each to over 90 community-based organizations to assist with education. These grants proved invaluable to the state's efforts to spread the word about the new election changes under HAVA. Interest groups throughout Montana produced television commercials, held informative presentations, provided promotional materials and brochures, and staffed booths at events around the state in order to inform their members and the general public about HAVA.

♦ The Secretary of State's elections office has been especially active in HAVA education through trade shows, Pow-Wows, state and county fairs, college events, and conventions, and has purchased and distributed popular promotional items to remind voters of identification requirements, educate them on the effects of overvotes and undervotes, and notify them of their right to vote provisionally.

♦ After initial regional trainings of county election officials, the state elections office staff traveled around the state to train county election judges on all election day procedures, and especially on identification requirements and provisional balloting.

Upcoming HAVA Efforts

♦ The state is again contracting with specially trained staff from the Montana Advocacy Program to survey polling places to ensure that they are accessible to individuals with disabilities. Election officials from counties whose polling places do not yet meet federal accessibility requirements will be permitted to apply for newly available grant funding to update their polling places and to educate their county election judges on facilitating accessibility.

♦ Montana is finalizing the implementation of the statewide voter database, including training state and county election officials at over a dozen regional meetings. All suggested improvements will be carefully logged by an innovative tracking system and reviewed by the Election Technology Task Force, made up of state election officials and a representative sample of county election administrators. The state will continue to improve the system throughout the year to ensure that any and all concerns are addressed and resolved.

♦ The state is on schedule for implementation of new voting systems equipped for individuals with disabilities. Montana has purchased the systems and contracted for extensive training, maintenance, and in-person support for them. The systems will mark a regular ballot that will be counted by hand or by a separate counting system. The new accessible systems will allow for individuals with disabilities and other interested electors to privately mark their ballots, while at the same time ensuring the security of the election process through the use of paper ballots that will provide a record of the votes cast in the event of an election dispute.

♦ The Secretary of State's staff plans to continue attending regional education events across the state and will produce new advertisements and Public Service Announcements to inform the public about the latest changes under HAVA, and about the implementation of the statewide voter registration database and the proper use of the new voting systems equipped for individuals with disabilities.

New Jersey Help America Vote Act

The “Help America Vote Act of 2002" was enacted by Congress on October 29, 2002 and is intended to provide federal monies to assist the upgrading of a state’s voting equipment and to provide for the implementation of procedures that would protect each citizen’s right to vote, while maintaining confidence in the integrity of a state’s election system. New Jersey has received $84.9 million federal dollars to implement the intent and mandates of the act. HAVA , among many other mandates, provides for three main initiatives: the replacement of all lever and punch card voting machines, the creation of a Statewide Voter Registration System, and the creation of a Voter Outreach and Education Initiative. Statewide Voter Registration System New Jersey contracted with Covansys Corporation to provide and implement a Statewide Voter Registration System (SVRS). The vendor is in the process of implementing an application known as ElectioNet. The ElectioNet provides the ability to process election management, preelection preparation, petitions, absentee ballots, and on-going administration with minimal custom configurations. The system also provides a majority of the reporting capabilities through pre-designed reports. The SVRS is designed to ensure that each registered voter will be uniquely identified and tracked within the SVRS, enabling the Office of the Attorney General through the Division of Elections to ensure that duplicate records are removed. The SVRS also allows the county election officials to remove from the list only those voters who are not eligible to vote. The SVRS is fully internet based and will enable immediate electronic access by authorized state and local election officials. The SVRS has been deployed for pilot implementation in three counties. At the present time, the most current New Jersey voter registration information is maintained at the county level. On February 15, 2006, the State will begin User Acceptance Testing and Regression Testing of the application. The goal is to have the SVRS fully deployed and operational in May 2006. The Go-Live Schedule is as follows: Gloucester, Hudson, Middlesex, Monmouth and Sussex - 3/27/06 Hunterdon, Morris, Somerset, Union and Warren - 4/26/06 Atlantic, Camden, Cape May and Cumberland - 5/12/06 Salem - 5/3/06 Burlington - 5/17/06 Bergen and Passaic - 5/18/06 Voting Machines There were seven counties in New Jersey that were using mechanical lever voting machines: Camden, Cape May, Cumberland, Essex, Hudson, Mercer and Monmouth Counties. The State will reimburse these counties for 75% of the cost of the machines. Audio Kits HAVA requires that voting machines are to be equipped to permit voters with disabilities to cast a vote privately and independently. Therefore, the State will be purchasing audio kits to retrofit the voting machines in nine counties. All counties are expected will be installed with these kits in March. Provisional Voting Legislation regarding provisional voting has been enacted. In addition, the State has implemented and set-up a free access system. Through this system, the voter would be advised if her/his ballot was counted or not, and if not counted, the reason for the rejection. Voting Information New Jersey has developed and implemented new Voter Information displays at the polling places. First-Time Voter Identification Requirements. Legislation concerning first time voters has been enacted which requires voters to provide a driver’s license or the last 4 digits of her/his social security number. In the event that a voter does not possess the required two primary forms of identification, then an identifying document may be accepted. Absentee Ballots Absentee voting in New Jersey has changed with the recent passing of the “No excuse Absentee Ballot Law” which became effective July 7, 2005. The voter must complete a an application which is available at the county clerk’s office and return it to the county clerk at least seven (7) days by mail or in person at 3:00pm the day before the election. Polling Place Accessibility: Three years ago the Division of Elections began an initiative to improve polling place accessibility. Since the beginning, the Division of Elections has closely collaborated with election officials and advocates of voters with disabilities to achieve the goal of 100% polling place accessibility. The Division of Elections has hosted three annual Polling Place Accessibility Workshops. These workshops have been well attended and as a result have become too large that this year we held dual workshops, which were attended by over 200 election officials. The collaboration has been positive and has resulted in much needed training, communication and exchange of ideas, between election officials and people with disabilities. At the present time the Division is in the process of implementing accredited ADA training for election officials.

Mock Elections The Division of Elections was selected by the National Student Parent Mock Elections to serve as the national mock elections headquarters during the 2004 Presidential Elections. This is the first time that the Division of Elections has served in this capacity and this followed the Division’s national recognition award for ranking #1 during the 2002 National Student Parent Mock Elections. The mock election was held on October 28, 2004 and students voted on the internet and the votes were reported to the Division of Elections from all 50 states, Washington, D.C., and American schools all around the world. Students voted for President, U.S. Senators, U.S. Representatives, Governors, and special issues of national importance. The children were the real winners of this election. The mission of the National Student/Parent Mock Election is to educate and empower young Americans and their parents to participate and vote. Post Election Forum The Division of Elections continues to hold post election forums for election officials after each primary and general election. The forum serves to gather data and concerns from the election officials and this has proven to be an instrumental tool to address serious communication and election administration questions that affected recent elections. The forums have led to collaborative discussions on ways to resolve problems in future elections. Last year the Division initiated a training workshop for mandated public agencies responsible for the National Voter Registration Act. In addition, the Division has conducted significant outreach with all levels of the state’s election officials including the county clerks, municipal clerks, board of elections and superintendents of election. The Division has also developed new educational publications for election officials and voters that are free to download from our website - www.njelections.org. Voter Outreach As part of New Jersey’s efforts to spread awareness about the importance of voting, a number of public awareness initiatives were undertaken in an effort to remind eligible voters of the importance of voting. A Statewide voter review was initiated to ensure that persons who died or had moved from the state were purged from the rolls in order to insure the integrity of elections. This enormous task included matching up every absentee and provisional ballot cast in the November general election with data on deceased persons provided by the State Bureau of Vital Statistics. Public service announcements by famous New Jersey native, were taped and aired in a vote registration campaign. As a result, over 500,000 new voter registrations were received in election offices. Toward educating and attracting New Jersey students to the electoral process, the HAVA unit sponsored a Hip Hop Summit that was attended by several thousand students. One-third of the counties in the State of New Jersey fall under the Voting Rights Act, Minority Language provisions, and in light of this the Division of Elections initiated many radio and television promotions to inform voters of changes and new information. Election Official Training In cooperation with Rutgers the State University, the following three courses for election officials were developed: (1) Basic County Election Officials Training; (2) Advanced County Election Officials Training; (3) Voting Devices. The State paid the tuition for each county official or employee who enrolled and completed the Basic course. The Division of Election is in the process of expanding this training to include a substantive ADA and polling place accessibility training. Administrative Complaint Procedure The State has developed and implemented an administrative complaint procedure as required by HAVA. North Carolina TITLE I SECTION 101 HAVA FUNDS Section 101 funds have been used by North Carolina to improve the local area networks (LAN) for our statewide computer voter registration database, SEIMS. All North Carolina counties received new SEIMS Servers from these funds, and many counties were also provided software, firmware and hardware from these funds to operate within the SEIMS system. Also funded from Title I, Section 101were;

a. One-Stop No Excuse Absentee Voting Grants to counties for the 2004 elections to open and operate additional voting locations starting nineteen days prior to election day.

b. Student Election Assistants Grants to counties for obtaining high school poll workers for the 2004 elections. c. Polling Place Accessibility Grants (see below under EAID grants) in 2004 and 2005. d. Public Workstation Grants for the purchase and placement of computers for public use to access SEIMS and the SBOE

website at county elections offices. e. Voter registration information as part of 4 million voter guides distributed in 2004. f. Extensive training to election officials regarding the implementation of HAVA requirements. g. Provisional voting support for the 2004 elections. h. Revised voter registration forms to be HAVA compliant and more user friendly.

TITLE I SECTION 102 HAVA FUNDS

North Carolina received $893,822 in Title I Section 102 funds on June 16, 2003, to aid in the replacement of punch card and lever machines. These funds were distributed to the entitled counties on June 30, 2003. TITLE II HAVA FUNDS North Carolina received $23,431,708 in FY03 HAVA Title II requirement funds. On August 23, 2004, North Carolina received $42,046,100 in FY04 HAVA Title II requirement funds. This was supplemented by a total of $3,444,133 in state matching funds that had been appropriated by the North Carolina General Assembly prior to the delivery of the federal HAVA Title II requirement funds. Expenditures of the Title II requirement funds by North Carolina have been in the following areas: 1. Technology and Electronic Access Grants were made in 2004 and 2005 to

counties to improve election administration. The purpose of the program was to bring the technology level of county elections offices up to a level that wouldallow them to more efficiently operate as to their day to day operations. This program also directly improved the operations of the statewide voter registration database (SEIMS).

2. List Maintenance Grants to counties to help them conduct required list maintenance in 2005. 3. A 2004 electronic poll book pilot project in Guilford County. 4. The production of reusable Voter Information Posters, as required by Section 302 of HAVA, in English and Spanish for all 2800

North Carolina precincts. 5. Improvements to help the North Carolina statewide voter registration database (SEIMS) to conform to HAVA requirements.

Included in these improvements were software, firmware, and hardware purchases. Also, a grant was made to the NC DMV to help implement the ID verification interface with DMV. North Carolina started its development of a statewide voter registration database in 1996, had it first implemented in 1999, and it is now fully implemented in all 100 counties on a real-time basis. As mandated by Section 303 of HAVA, SEIMS has been and continues to be upgraded to meet the requirements set out in that

section. SEIMS improvements have been made in the voter registration area as to ID verification interface with DMV, confirmation and verification NVRA procedures, and first-time voter ID requirement support.

6. North Carolina is purchasing voting systems by counties under a single vendor contract generated by a RFP. S.L. 2005-323 also mandated grants, using Title II HAVA funds, to counties in excess of $43,000,000 for the purchase of voting systems. The current voting systems program is headed by a project manager, supplemented by eight (8) regional State Board employees who will help

implement, train and trouble shoot voting systems being installed. HAVA compliant voting systems should be operational for the 2006 elections.

HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES EAID GRANTS The North Carolina State Board of Elections implemented the HAVA Accessibility Grant program to allow counties that showed accessibility needs at the surveyed sites to apply for grants to improve the polling places to make them accessible to voters. Based upon needs shown in the survey of the total 2800 polling places in North Carolina, checks for $1,527,908 were issued for accessibility grants to county boards of elections. $209,029 of the FY2003 EAID-HAVA grant and $200,165 of the FY2004 EAID-HAVA grant were used to fund these grants. The State Board of Elections authorized the use of Title I Section 101 HAVA funds to cover the balance of the $1,527,908 in county grants. $60,000 in FY2003 EAID-HAVA funds and $20,000 in FY2004 EAID-HAVA funds were spent to place digital photographs of every polling place in North Carolina to show accessibility aspects of the polling location with the records of the 5,500,000 voters on the State Board of Electio ns website. In addition to being able to view photos of their polling location, every time a voter accesses their voter registration record on the State Board website, they are also able to access a map to his or her voting place and a sample ballot in which they are entitled to vote. This allows a person with a disability to make the best judgment and preparation for voting in person, curbside, absentee, or to request a handicap transfer. Project Description In order to ensure consistency, fairness and accuracy in North Carolina’s elections process, the State Board of Elections is developing uniform forms, procedures and training for use by elections administrators statewide. The State Board of Elections is developing these procedures with input from two focus groups, and as part of a pilot project coordinated with Dr. Robert Montjoy of the University of New Orleans and JoAnne Chasnow of Project Vote. The State Board supervises the appointment and training of 400 county board members and directors, in addition to precinct officials and other election-day staff, a total which exceeds 20,000 people. In the past, the State Board of Elections specified rules, policies and best practices of election procedures, and allowed each county to determine its own best method for complying with election laws as long as they did not conflict with general statutes or the State Board of Elections. Consequently, forms and procedures for testing voting equipment; securing equipment, ballots and supplies; conducting audits and recounts; performing canvass; setting up polling places; ensuring ADA compliance and providing voter assistance vary from county to county and polling place to polling place. The pilot project will result in uniform forms and procedures as recommended by the focus group and approved by the State Board of Elections, as well as statewide use of electronic pollbooks, pollworker recruitment, precinct official vests, websites for every county elections board, Internet-based sample ballot distribution and digital on-demand training. On-demand training will be developed with special emphasis on the learning needs of senior citizens, and will include sensitivity training for people with disabilities, with low literacy skills and with low English language proficiency.

North Dakota In North Dakota, all levels of government, advocacy groups and interested citizens each have a voice and an essential role in determining the direction of HAVA. All development and implementation of HAVA related programs and projects are directed by statewide committees (nine in total), which are coordinated by the North Dakota Association of Counties (NDACo). All committee recommendations are reviewed for approval by the Secretary of State and his staff; to date, no recommendation has been overruled. Implementation of the recommendations is jointly administered by the Secretary of State’s office and NDACo. The State of North Dakota is pleased to share its HAVA successes prior to the January 1, 2006 deadline of the Act. Voting Equipment & Election Administration Software In January of 2004 Secretary of State Al Jaeger signed a contract with Election Systems & Software (ES&S) to provide a uniform voting system for every polling site in North Dakota’s 53 counties. The contract provided for one Model 100 Optical Scan unit and one iVotronic (replaced by AutoMARK in a subsequent amendment) for each polling site. The State took delivery of approximately half the Model 100’s in February 2004, and certified, tested and accepted the units for distribution to 28 counties in March of 2004. The State held regional training for the counties in April, prior to their use in the June 8 primary election. All 28 counties who used the Model 100’s were pleased with the equipment and the marked improvement in election night efficiency for results tallying and reporting. In October of 2005 Secretary Jaeger signed an amendment to the existing ES&S contract, which replaced the iVotronic with the AutoMARK. The State certified, took delivery, tested and distributed the remaining Model 100’s and AutoMARK units in May and November 2005, respectively. All counties received and had in place the new statewide uniform voting system by December 15, 2005. North Dakota was the first state in the country to roll out the AutoMARK statewide. The State, in conjunction with ES&S, will be providing detailed equipment and administration training for all 53 counties at 10 regional training sites during February and March of 2006. All voting system research, planning, development and implementation was cooperatively prepared by statewide committees (HAVA Steering Committee, HAVA Planning Committee and Voting System Procurement Committee), which were composed of state and local election officials and advocates for the disabilities community. The partnership between these entities provided the necessary groundwork and foundation for North Dakota to procure and successfully implement the voting system preferred by its citizens. The state is currently working with ES&S to implement election administration software for applications such as polling site management, poll worker information, petition review, polling site locater, absentee and early voting management, and a database known as the Central Voter File containing a record of everyone who voted in recent elections statewide. The plan for this project calls for a statewide implementation date of December 2007. Education Education efforts, which began prior to the 2004 election cycle, include statewide media campaigns, grant programs, uniform poll worker training and polling site materials, educational videos, public presentations and demonstrations, alternative format materials, and other handouts and brochures. For examples of the education projects, please contact HAVA Coordinator Danette Odenbach at dodenbac@ndaco.org or (701) 328-7318. Media Campaigns: In 2004 the state ran a media campaign designed to remind voters of the new identification requirement, passed into law in the 2003 legislative session. Advertisements ran statewide on billboards, radio and in print. In 2006, two media campaigns will run on radio, television and in print. The campaigns will focus on the identification requirement and filling in the ovals on the ballots. Both campaigns will run statewide prior to the June and November elections. Grant Program: In 2004 the state provided grants to two entities for the purpose of voter education. The grant recipients were Literacy Leadership (Newspapers in Education) and United Tribes Technical College (UTTC). Literacy Leadership provided over 60,000 copies of the Declare Yourself newspaper supplement to every college campus (public, tribal and private) in North Dakota, and to every junior and senior high school class participating in the Newspapers in Education program. The supplement provided readers with the necessary information to research candidates, determine their North Dakota polling site, or if they were a college student from another state, to register and vote absentee in their home state (North Dakota does not have voter registration). UTTC provided multiple voter education opportunities for tribal members enrolled in any of North Dakota’s five tribal colleges and to those who were living on or off any of North Dakota’s four reservations. The UTTC program included voter education classes, door-to-door distribution of voting information, creation and distribution of a voter education video, and student involvement as greeters at polling sites on Election Day. In 2005, five entities were awarded grants for the purpose of voter education. Grantees include United Tribes Technical College (UTTC), North Dakota Center for Persons with Disabilities (NDCPD), Communication Services for the Deaf (CSD), the Bismarck/Mandan Chapter of League of Women Voters (LWV-BM), and KAT Productions. All grantees are currently developing

their education programs, most of which involve creation and distribution of voter education materials in accessible formats, hands-on interaction with the AutoMARK, voter education classes, and small group voting procedure training opportunities. LWV-BM and KAT Productions are partnered to create two voter education videos, which will complete a library of five voter education videos to be made available to the public. Education Videos: In 2004, UTTC created a voter education video themed to engage native voters in the election process. In 2005, work began on four additional videos, each themed for a different audience. When completed this spring, the voter education video collection will include videos for native, elderly and youth voters, one for the general public, and one directed at poll workers. The poll worker video is designed to teach poll workers how to respectfully and effectively assist voters with disabilities in the polling site. All videos will be distributed statewide to interested organizations, and will also be made available to the general public via the Secretary of State’s and NDACo’s websites. All videos will have closed captioning and the general education video will provide an option for American Sign Language (ASL). The videos include helpful footage of voters using the AutoMARK and the Model 100. Entities interested in using any of the footage from these videos are encouraged to contact HAVA Coordinator Danette Odenbach at dodenbac@ndaco.org or (701) 328-7318 for more information. Uniform poll worker training and polling site materials: In 2004 a PowerPoint was created to help counties using the Model 100’s for the first time train their poll workers. Many counties found this to be helpful, so in 2006 the State and NDACo, through the HAVA Education Committee, began developing an online poll worker training module. The module is designed to allow anyone to go through the training poll workers receive, but it also allows the counties to track their poll worker’s progress and participation with the online training module. This module is not designed to replace in-person training, but to supplement and reinforce the training provided while allowing the general public to experience the training a poll worker receives prior to an election. The module is currently under development, but will be available on the NDACo website by May of 2006 (North Dakota’s Primary Election is June 13). Because every polling site in North Dakota uses a uniform voting system, uniform polling site materials have been designed and distributed for use statewide, as well. Posters detailing election law, voting procedures, voter rights, ID requirements, and voting instructions have been provided to all 53 counties. Accessibility Through the HHS grant program, all exterior accessibility signage (parking, directional, accessible and inaccessible entry) needed by each county has been provided at no cost to the county. In addition, polling site accessibility improvement costs are being matched at an 80%-20% ratio. Under the program, counties make an improvement to a polling site; submit their expense to the state; and are reimbursed for 80% of their cost, up to a maximum based on the number of polling sites that county operates. According to the polling site accessibility surveys completed by the State in 2004, most polling sites had very few and minor improvements to be made, most included changing door hardware and/or addressing curb-cut and threshold height issues. The State anticipates every polling site will be fully accessible by the June 13 Primary Election. Ohio Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell has been among the nation’s leaders in timely compliance with all aspects of the Help America Vote Act of 2002.

• Ohio’s first large-scale use of electronic voting systems (which included voter-verifiable paper trails) was a great success during the November 8, 2005 General Election.

• More than 15,000 new voting machines were used by nearly one million voters and the secretary of state’s office was overwhelmed with positive reports.

• 671 training classes of at least three hours in length were attended by more than 20,000 poll workers and election officials. • 400 roving technicians traveled to polling locations where the new electronic voting machines were used. The technicians

answered questions and addressed any problems when necessary. Also, each precinct was equipped with emergency paper ballots in case of technical difficulties not immediately correctable.

• Voters with disabilities were able to use the features of the new systems to vote without assistance, ensuring the privacy that all other voters expect and deserve.

• Before the Ohio Secretary of State issued final certifications for Direct Recording Electronic models, Compuware Corporation was hired to conduct extensive security reassessments and revalidations. This included the nation’s most thorough review of all hardware and software, including source code and voter-verifiable printer accessories. Further, before the 2005 General Election, each of the 15,000 new machines was individually tested for accuracy by an independent verification and validation service.

For the February 7 Special Election, Ohio will have an additional 16 counties rolling out new machines in a limited number of precincts. By the May 2, 2006 primary, all Ohio counties will be using HAVA-compliant voting equipment. Some of Ohio’s 88 counties will use precinct count optical scan devices, while others will use touch screen DRE systems. For more information on Ohio’s voting systems and a detailed description of the extensive security reviews, go to the Ohio Secretary of State’s website at www.sos.state.oh.us and follow the link on the left side to “HAVA – Election Reform,” then click the link to “statewide voting systems.”

The other major aspect of the Help America Vote Act is the centralized voter registration database. Each county board of elections in Ohio chose their own vendor to design a database system that best suited their particular needs. Vendors, which include Diebold, Elections Systems & Software, Triad, and Sequoia, then configured their respective voter list management systems for compatibility with the centralized database in the secretary of state’s office.

• After a two-year implementation process, on December 9, 2005 the Ohio secretary of state announced the completion of a statewide state-of-the-art centralized system.

• The upgrade brings Ohio into full compliance with federal law. • By establishing a real-time voter management and query system, county election officials can easily cross-reference voter

registration information. • With this secure and up-to-date voter file, county and state election officials can quickly resolve voter registration accuracy

and duplication issues. For more information on all aspects of the Help America Vote Act in Ohio, go to the Ohio Secretary of State’s website at www.sos.state.oh.us and follow the link on the left side to “HAVA – Election Reform.” Oregon Oregon’s state and local election officials have been both creative and innovative as they work towards the successful implementation of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). While the uniqueness of Oregon’s election system (i.e. Statewide Vote-By-Mail) has offered interesting challenges, it has also provided officials with unique opportunities. However, many of these challenges or opportunities would not have succeeded without one over-arching premise that has led the entire HAVA effort: Inclusion. Up and down the entire spectrum of projects, programs, pilots, systems development, and a host of other efforts related to HAVA, the key ingredient to success, beyond a good deal of hard work, has been the inclusion of as many stakeholders as possible in the process. This has ensured a very high level of support, ownership, and intentional action toward common goals and results by all stakeholders. Successful Oregon projects that were implemented and successfully completed to meet HAVA requirements were the following: • Replacement of all remaining Punchcard and Lever Voting Systems, • Implementation of the new Federal voting registration requirements for 01/01/2006, • Establish and implement a HAVA Administrative Complaint Procedure, and • Physical improvements and barrier removal for election offices (polling places) using the HHS grant funds While the above efforts were critical to improving the overall administration of elections and to comply with HAVA requirements, they are common to most other states and do not, in and of themselves, represent some of the more innovative implementation efforts undertaken by Oregon. Other HAVA requirements however, did inspire programs and projects that allowed the state to approach both the “letter” of the law and the “spirit” of the law as it pertains to HAVA. Toll Free Election Line – 1-866-ORE-VOTES The toll free election line was envisioned as a statewide call center that would provide free one-stop service for information and questions Oregonians would have about elections. It was important that it be ubiquitous throughout the state, include multiple language capability, and could increase call capacity over time. Additionally, call fulfillment would be handled on-site or by transferring the caller to the appropriate county or the Secretary of State Office Elections Division. Unique to the project was the location of the call center. It is located at the Oregon State Correctional Institute (OSCI). OSCI has had successful contracts to provide call center services to the Secretary of State, Corporate Division and Oregon Medical Assistance Program for several years. They have a history of excellent service as well as a reliable and sustainable work force. Not surprisingly, the cost benefit analysis was quite favorable for this solution. The success of the call center has been quite amazing. As an example of the service that is provided to county election officials: In October and November leading up to the General Election of 2004 the call center representatives fulfilled over 17.300 calls. This number represents nearly 80% of the total number of calls received by the call center during this time.

The ability to fulfill the large number of calls on-site was directly related to two special tools that have been developed for the call center representatives. First, an interactive, question driven, “desk manual” was created in a PDF format and resides on the desktop of each of the representative computer terminal. The manual was created using questions from county clerks. Second, a ballot dropbox location application was developed using ArcExplorer, a GIS tool, that allowed representatives to enter a cross street location anywhere in the state and locate the nearest ballot dropbox to that location. Both of these tools are updates regularly and “pushed out” to the call center computer terminals via Citrix. Oregon Centralized Voter Registration System – OCVR While the centralized voter registration system in not unique to Oregon, the approach Oregon has taken to build the system is. It has included direct involvement, cooperation, and “buy-in by all 36 county clerks to ensure a statewide consensus on both requirements and processes. The task of building a “top-down” system, including election management functions as well as a statewide database of voters, has been monumental. In order to achieve this, a project management team was dedicated as resources to handle all aspects of the project including; contracting, scheduling, technical, stakeholder outreach and management, and project quality assurance. Stakeholder involvement has been key to the success of this project. From the beginning of the project county election offices representing all major variables (county size, current systems, etc) have been directly involved. Joint Application Development (JAD) teams met throughout the state over the life of the development cycle to ensure the requirements were accurately captured. Several committees and work groups were established to work on issues and make final decisions. In accordance with HAVA requirements all 36 counties were successfully migrated to the functional new system by January 1, 2006. Disability Subcommittee/Alternate Formats As part of the inclusion theory that has permeated Oregon’s approach to HAVA implementation the Secretary of State formed a Disability Subcommmittee in November of 2003. Representation on this committee includes members of the Secretary of State staff, county election officials, disability advocates, and people with wide range of disabilities. The Disability Subcommittee develops, coordinates, and presents recommendations, both projects and initiatives, to the HAVA Steering Committee. The recommended projects and initiatives are designed to provide opportunities for the state to become compliant with the disability requirements of HAVA. As funds allow, additional projects and initiatives are developed and recommended that will assist counties and election officials in providing services for persons with disabilities and improving the overall administration of elections in the state. Some of the more interesting and unique projects that have been developed and implemented by this subcommittee are: Alternate Formats of Election Materials –

• Large print Voting In Oregon Guide • Audio (CD, Tape, Streaming Web Audio) Voting In Oregon Guide • Large print voter registration card • Accessible web Election Questions and Answers (call center “desk manual) • Conversation of .pdf documents on the web to accessible formats for screenreaders • Rewrite and redesign of Voting In Oregon Guide for easier understanding and readability • Spanish version of Voting In Oregon Guide • Audio version of the Oregon Voters’ Pamphlet

Computer Ballot Pilot Project - This Project was designed to allow voters that are blind or visually impaired to vote privately and independently at home using standard assistive technology. Volunteers from Deschutes County provided us with contact information to be able to determine the appropriate ballot style. The ballot was then converted into an accessible Hyper Text Markup Language (HTML) format. This ballot was then saved to a floppy disk along with instruction files and mailed to the volunteers. When the volunteer received their ballot on the disk they inserted in into their computer, voted the ballot following the instructions, printed in the ballot, placed it in the secrecy envelope, and returned it using the ballot return envelope. The return envelope also included a tactile signature line. We are hoping to extend this project to a larger county in a future election. Congregate Care Project – This project was conducted during the General Election in 2004. The intent of the project was to reach out to voters in Congregate Care Assistive Living Facilities. Many people with disabilities in Oregon have been unaware that they can, if necessary, request assistance in completing their ballot during any election. This educational outreach also provided an opportunity to train volunteers, care providers, facilities’’ staff, and administrators in how to legally and appropriately assist voters requesting assistance to complete the ballot. This program will be expanded in conjunction with whatever accessible voting system in implemented in the state. Disability Awareness Training –

This project provides county election staff with training, information, resources, and tools to enable them to provide services to and assist voters with disabilities, It is designed to improve elections management and services throughout the State of Oregon. Design For Democracy: Oregon is the first state to acknowledge the importance of graphic design in enhancing the readability, usability and accessibility of elections communication. Since November 2003, the Oregon Elections Division has employed a full-time, in-house graphic designer. The designer follows models developed by Design for Democracy, the organization that was recently commissioned to establish national design/usability guidelines with NIST and the EAC. Projects have included:

• Oregon’s Voter Registration card for HAVA compliance • The Oregon ballot • Oregon Election manuals and forms • Outreach collateral including public services announcements • Educational materials including the Election Q&A website

Pennsylvania Voting Systems The certification of Electronic Voting Systems (Systems) for use in the first federal election of 2006 has been a very challenging task for Pennsylvania. I arrived on March 28, 2005 and was made aware that three examinations had already taken place. Pennsylvania requires systems to be certified by the Department of State (Department) as well as by a Federal Independent Testing Authority. Not much happened through July 2005 with Systems, but our Chief of the HAVA Division left state employment. The Department did manage to schedule some System examinations in July and August but we ran into problems with vendor cancellations, non-delivery of source code, and the resignation of our new chief of the HAVA Division. This gentleman was in charge of all System examinations. The Secretary of the Commonwealth, Pedro A. Cortés, then put me in charge of the effort to have voting machines certified. That was August 12, 2005. At that moment in time the state had certified one System, denied certification to another, and would not write a report on the third because of non-delivery of source code. Pennsylvania then determined not to look at any System unless the source code was delivered to us before the examination. Once that was established, we began to set up examinations with clearer guidelines. The process since then has involved constant contact with vendors, consultants and counties. The Secretary certified two Systems in November, two more in December, and three in January for a total of eight before the year’s end. Three more were certified this past week. We knew that counties would have to be ready to buy Systems quickly in order to meet the deadline of May 16, 2006, our first federal election. To help them, the Commonwealth developed the CoStars Program which essentially put out an RFP for Voting Systems, had vendors send in their quotes and accept all bids so that counties could then just buy off of the state list. This saved the counties time and money. We strongly suggested that counties view and examine voting systems, pick out their top three choices and wait for their picks to get certified. The Department also asked and received from the 67 counties resolutions by the end of the year legally binding them to their HAVA county plan’s budgets. The end result is that all 67 counties are moving forward and will have HAVA compliant voting systems in place for the May 2006 primary. Statewide Uniform Registry of Electors The Statewide Uniform Registry of Electors (SURE) is a centralized voter registration and election management system designed to assure the accuracy and integrity of the Commonwealth's voter registration records maintained by the election authorities of Pennsylvania's 67 counties. The SURE system is a platform that supports the critical functions of the Commonwealth’s elections—from determining voter eligibility to assigning precincts to producing poll books. A centralized, uniform registry that is accessible to all county offices greatly enhances overall accuracy and integrity of the voter registration rolls, and the resulting quality of voter services. By placing all Pennsylvania counties on a common software platform: • Duplicate registrations across county lines are presented to election officials for resolution; • When registered voters move across county lines, their existing records and voting history are transferred to the new county of

residence; • External agency transactions that affect voter eligibility from the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) and the

Department of Health (DOH) are centrally integrated with SURE and electronically forwarded to county officials; • A single interface to PennDOT and the Social Security Administration (SSA) provide access to information for verification of

applicants’ driver’s license and social security numbers in compliance with the Help America Vote Act (HAVA); • HAVA voter ID requirements are implemented uniformly throughout the state; and • Voter registry maintenance programs operate on a consistent statewide basis to remove "deadwood," keeping the registry up-to-

date, protecting against potential voter fraud, and promoting consistency among counties in their data management practices.

SURE Implementation Pennsylvania began development of its centralized voter registration system with the enactment of Act 3 of 2002, prior to the passage of HAVA. Act 3 of 2002 sets forth the requirements for the system, specifying that SURE must be a “single, uniform integrated computer system. All [voter registration] commissions shall be connected electronically to the SURE system and shall maintain their registration records in the system.” Act 3 also makes a number of amendments to the voter registration act that make voter registration processes more amendable to electronic processing. A contract was signed with Accenture during the summer of 2002, and implementation of SURE began immediately. Four pilot counties were live in the SURE system in time for the 2003 Primary Election. Two larger counties were added prior to the General Election in November of 2003. In late 2003, the Department contracted with a vendor to conduct an in-process quality assurance review of the SURE project. The review was conducted by InfoSENTRY Services, Inc., which issued a report to the Department in January 2004. Overall, InfoSENTRY found that SURE was largely in compliance with the requirements of the system and that the project should move forward, albeit at a slower pace. As a result of the review, the Department slowed implementation of the project by delaying go-live in eleven counties until after the 2004 Primary election. This delay allowed the Department to implement many of InfoSENTRY’s recommendations for further improving the SURE system prior to deployment in the Commonwealth’s largest counties. In the meantime, 50 additional counties were brought onto SURE for a total of 56 live counties prior to the 2004 Primary Election. In response to concerns about SURE system performance and several functional areas, the Department worked with the vendor during the spring of 2005 to develop a Go-Forward Strategy for Full Implementation. The strategy defined specific performance goals that the system was required to meet prior to bringing on the remaining counties. It also outlined functional enhancements to be implemented in a number of areas, including data entry and absentee processing. The Department’s long-term goals for the SURE project were also presented in the strategy, including implementation of a report-writer capability, a Dynamic Import Process for voter registration applications, and several “portal” views of SURE data to allow county, state, and public constituents to access SURE information without compromising SURE’s security or performance. During the summer of 2005, the SURE system was tested strenuously for performance and capacity. First, a baseline performance test was conducted. Following installation of a software upgrade aimed at improving performance, the system was retested. The results of the performance test, which were confirmed by a third party, proved that the SURE system had met the performance goals of the Go-Forward Strategy, and that the system could handle the addition of the remaining counties without degrading performance for all. As a result, ten of the remaining eleven counties went live on SURE during August and September of 2005. Philadelphia was added to the system on December 27, 2005. Finally, during January 2006, the requirements of HAVA with regard to verification of driver’s license and social security numbers were implemented in SURE with the deployment of a new software build and interface on January 20. This deployment allows all county voter registration officials to access information in the PennDOT and SSA databases through SURE for the purpose of verifying the identity of all new voters in compliance with federal law. Outlook Now that all counties have been converted to the SURE system, and the HAVA verification requirements are in place, the Department is focusing its efforts on the development of some of the additional elements of the Go-Forward Strategy, including the report-writer, the Dynamic Import Process, and the “portal” views. Phase 1 of the portal development has been completed, including the ability for voters to look up and get directions to their polling place over the Internet. County and agency users are able to conduct lookups of SURE data (without touching the live SURE system) and post news items and FAQs to the website. Phase 2 of the portal development, slated for release in April, will include the ability for voters to apply to register or change their address online (with paper signature to follow) and view information on voting machines and provisional ballots. The Department plans to further develop the functionality of the SURE portals, taking advantage of the SURE system’s overall successes, in the years ahead. Puerto Rico Puerto Rico’s Elections Commission (Comisión Estatal de Elecciones, Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico) is receiving less than $1 per voter in HAVA funds. By comparison, DC, which also has non-voting federal representation will receive approximately $20.5 per voter, and the other territories are receiving over $14 per voter. In fact, the smallest state will receive approximately $23 per voter to help pay for the HAVA mandates, and the largest state will receive approximately $7.5 per voter. The challenge for Puerto Rico, then, is to meet the mandatory requirements without even receiving a fraction of the congressionally estimated amount needed to make the mandatory changes under HAVA. Despite that challenge, the Commission has accomplished the following to date:

The Commission succeeded in making the voting process more accessible to deaf voters. Three projects deserve notice: first, the Commission produced a sign language poster explaining the voting process; second, the Commission included closed captioning on all its public service announcements; third, one of the voter outreach TV advertisements produced by the Commission was principally in sign language, with closed captioning underneath so it could be understood by all other voters.

The Commission worked in close partnership the Oficina de Procurador del las Personas con Impedimento (OPPI), PR’s P&A agency, and other disability advocacy organizations to develop a multi-faceted accessibility effort in implementing HAVA and carrying out the HHS grants. In doing so, the Commission devoted time and resources to making the election administration process itself more accessible. To this end, the Commission undertook the following:

(1) Provided sign language interpretation at HAVA public hearings; (2) Made the Commission website fully accessible (the Commission was the first government agency in Puerto Rico whose website was certified as accessible); (3) The Commission purchased equipment and software to translate all the materials in its library into an accessible format. The equipment includes a Braille printer. (4) In addition, the Commission developed a voice-activated 24/7/365 telephone system for voter information, which includes TTY. (5) The Commission initiated absentee voting in 2004 brought directly to the voters in hospitals and for those who are bedridden at home by elections staff. (6) The Commission purchased new voting aids requested by disabled voters and advocacy groups. The Commission realized however, that the new aids, especially the temporary ramps, had to be clearly marked as belonging to the Commission, as they tended to disappear before being retrieved by the Commission after Election Day.

The emphasis on accessible polling places had a positive effect on a perpetual problem of temporary polling places; the number of temporary polling places was reduced from eleven (11) in the 2000 General Elections, to six (6) in 2004, out of over 1600 polling places. The Commission discovered that in order to ensure that polling places are accessible, it was necessary to establish a new protocol with local commissions, and require final approval of polling places by the central Commission. This change strengthened accountability and quality control over the polling place selection process.

The Commission, which has provided Braille/tactile ballot sleeves for blind voters to vote independently and unassisted, if they choose, for over a decade has now improved the voting process for blind voters and low vision, non-Braille readers. The Commission now provides Braille instructions on the Braille templates, and has added tactile numbering of candidates, so non-Braille reading persons with low vision can identify the candidate of their choice. Substantial work has also been done on a separate Braille brochure that explains elections and voting in Puerto Rico. Additionally, in Puerto Rico each voter is required to produce his Commission issued electoral photo ID prior to voting. This requirement can pose a difficulty for blind voters to identify the correct card in their wallet. Therefore the Commission produced a Braille sticker that can be attached to the Voter ID card facilitating easy retrieval of the card.

The Commission conducted a massive training that included training local election officials and the political parties on improving voting accessibility. This training focused on improving all facets of the interaction between the voter and the voting process and included sensitivity training and simulations of potential situations. This training, which was very well received, was greatly helped by the following:

(1) Involving the disability groups and individuals in developing and conducting all accessibility training; (2) Involving the highest level of election officials in accessibility training; (3) Providing an opportunity for training participants to evaluate the training.

The Commission equipped four mobile offices (vans) to provide voter registration and voting opportunities to all voters, but particularly those with disabilities (homebound and in-hospital) and to voters in remote areas. These are painted to attract attention to voter registration, and have greatly enhanced the Commission’s ability to assist otherwise under-served voters.

The Commission installed mechanized distribution controls at its warehouse to improve the accuracy and efficiency of the process of packing elections materials for all 1600+ polling places islandwide.

Background on Puerto Rico’s election system Puerto Rico has an independent, three person State Elections Commission, with each appointed by their respective political parties. The Commissioners unanimously appoint a President for a four year term, and also each appoints a Vice President, subject to consent of the other two parties’ Commissioners.

General Election Day, which occurs only once every four years, is the same day in the same year as the US Presidential election, and is a State holiday. The next general Election Day is November 4, 2008.

Polling places are open from 8AM to 3PM. Voter turnout traditionally is between 85% and 90% of the 2.5 million registered voters. Primaries for the general election are held sometime between eight months to a year prior to Election Day.

Puerto Rico has traditionally used paper ballots for all voters. On the general Election Day, Puerto Rican voters go to over 1600 polling places, which are broken down into “colleges” of approximately 375 voters per college. Voters are assigned alphabetically, except for the “easy access” college for disabled voters and the “provisional ballot” college for any voters who are challenged, or whose names do not appear in the local voter registration rolls. Voters get three separate paper ballots. On the first ballot, identical across Puerto Rico, Puerto Ricans elect their Governor and Resident Commissioner (who is Puerto Rico’s federal representative to Congress). Puerto Rico elects its entire legislature (51 members of the House of Representatives, including 11 at large, and 27

members of the Senate, including 11 at large) in a separate ballot. In addition, there is a third, separate ballot for each of Puerto Rico’s 78 municipal elections. In a general election year there are more than 120 different ballots.

The Commission has a staff of approximately 900 people; of those, approximately 350 are in the 110 local offices. In addition, Local Commissions have approximately 770 honorary members, headed by a President, who are municipal judges appointed by the Supreme Court and who serve during election periods on a voluntary basis and only receive a small stipend to cover food and transportation while on duty, as required by law. Local Commission staff positions are essentially equally divided among the three political parties. These staff members also serve on a voluntary basis, receiving a stipend. The local office staff is responsible for: (1) voter registration; (2) issuance of voter identification; (3) local voter information; (4) transaction reports; and (5) support for the local commissions. Rhode Island Secretary of State Matt Brown’s New Electronic “Motor Voter” Registration Produces 330% Jump in New Voter Registrations A new electronic voter registration system launched by Secretary of State Matt Brown in the fall of 2005, which allows Rhode Islanders to register to vote using a convenient touch pad system at seven Department of Motor Vehicle (DMV) locations and six AAA club locations, has resulted in a 330% increase in monthly registrations.

The program was made possible by Rhode Island’s development of a Central Voter Registration System as mandated by the Help America Vote Act. With all 39 cities and towns included in a top-down, state-of-the-art voting system, the technology was in place to move forward on this innovative electronic voter registration effort.

Brown said that in the months before Rhode Island became the first state in the nation to offer the new Motor Voter e-Registration system, the DMV produced 4,118 new registrations from January 1, 2005 through August 31, 2005, for an average of approximately 500 new registrations per month. The new Motor Voter e-Registration system has produced 8,611 new registrations in just four months, from September 1, 2005 to December 31, 2005, for an average of approximately 2,150 new registrations per month. In the first week of January alone, the electronic system produced 404 new registrations.

“Motor Voter e-Registration was created to give Rhode Islanders a convenient new way to register to vote and to take the first step to participate in elections,” said Brown. “The dramatic increase in new registrations is proof that when you make voter registration more convenient for people, it produces meaningful results.”

The electronic registration system replaces a paper system and modernizes voter registration in order to make the process more convenient, cut down on human error and reduce registration fraud. Motor Voter e-Registration is available at state DMV offices in Middletown, Pawtucket, Wakefield, Warren, Warwick, West Warwick and Westerly, as well as to AAA members at club locations in Cranston, Greenville, Middletown, Narragansett, Providence and Warwick.

When a citizen is getting a license or ID for the first time, renewing a license, or changing their name or address DMW employees must ask citizens if they would like to register to vote as required by state law. The Motor Voter e-Registration process takes minutes and uses technology similar to the touch-pads used at supermarkets, banks, and convenience stores. Citizens must still answer questions about their eligibility and swear an affirmation, just as they would have under the paper system.

Brown said the assistance of the DMV, the Rhode Island Board of Elections, and the local boards of canvassers was instrumental in the project. The Secretary of State’s Elections Division worked with each agency and local board to set up the system and complete training for employees from the DMV and local boards of canvassers.

“This is an innovative program that helps state and local election officials reach out to voters at a convenient location and the results speak volumes about the benefits of offering this service,” said Brown. “I am grateful to the DMV, the Board of Elections, and our local boards of canvassers for working with us to put this program in place and deliver such quality service to Rhode Islanders.” South Dakota State Plan: HAVA requires each state to prepare a “State Plan” for HAVA implementation. South Dakota’s State Plan was prepared by a state plan task force in the spring of 2003. The plan was updated in late 2004. You can view South Dakota’s state plan at www.sdsos.gov/electionsvoteregistration/electvoterpdfs/hava_stateplan_finalengrossed.pdf Provisional Ballots: South Dakota instituted provisional ballots in 2003. A provisional ballot is a ballot which may be voted on by a person who appears at a polling place and swears that he is registered to vote in that precinct but whose name does not appear on the voter registration list for that precinct. The purpose of a provisional ballot is to protect a person’s right to vote when his name has wrongly been omitted from the voter registration list. The provisional ballot is sealed in a special envelope which is not opened on election night. The provisional ballot is only counted if documentation can be located after Election Day proving that the person was properly registered to vote in his precinct. In the 2004 general election, 533 provisional ballots were cast; 66 of those ballots were counted. Punch cards: HAVA provides funding to replace all punch card voting in South Dakota. 10 South Dakota counties used punch card

voting in the 2000 general election. These counties now use optical scan ballots. Voter Registration Cards: HAVA requires mail-in voter registration forms to contain two specific questions regarding citizenship and age. South Dakota began using new registration forms in 2003. Voter Instructions: HAVA encourages providing instruction to voters on how to properly complete their ballots and what to do when problems arise in the voting process. South Dakota now requires additional notices in newspapers prior to Election Day, posters in each polling place, and instructions on each ballot. Instructions to not vote for more candidates than are allowed reduced the over-vote rate by two-thirds from 2000 to 2004. Statewide Voter Registration File: South Dakota went live with a statewide voter registration file in 2002. HAVA required us to make some programming changes to our voter file that would allow for a verification process and we had all these changes in place on January 1, 2004 except for the Social Security Administration verification which was completed in August, 2005. The cost for the programming and hardware for the statewide voter registration file was $350,000. Voter Registration Verification: HAVA requires that each new voter registration be verified. South Dakota established a computer network to do this verification beginning in January 2004. Each voter registration is compared to felon records, death records, and driver’s license or social security records to ensure that each registrant is eligible to vote in South Dakota. This verification process has prevented nearly 100 convicted felons from illegally registering to vote. Polling Place Access: HAVA provides funds for South Dakota counties to make access improvements to their polling places. These improvements include disability parking spots, signage, ramps, curb cuts, and doorway improvements to allow easier access to our polling places. Voter Assist Terminals: HAVA requires that each polling place for any federal election beginning in 2006 be equipped with a voter assist terminal. These machines are designed to provide all voters—including those with disabilities—the means to vote independently and privately. South Dakota has chosen the AutoMARK from Election Systems and Software. In certain counties in South Dakota (as required by federal law) the AutoMARK will also be provided with a Lakota language option (via the headphones). The AutoMARK will debut in Sioux Falls and Madison for municipal and school elections on April 11, 2006. The AutoMARK will be used in all polling places in South Dakota for the June 6 primary and November 7 general election. Utah The State of Utah took on the task of implementing HAVA soon after its passage in 2002. Utah quickly implemented provisional voting by passing legislation in the 2003 session of the Utah State Legislature. The County Clerks have done an amazing job in implementing and coordinating the use of provisional ballots. The Utah State Legislature also passed legislation in 2003 that enacted the HAVA requirements of voter registration by mail. County Clerks are now required to notify registrants if errors are found in voter registrations and have first time registrants provide photo identification at the polls. The use of provisional ballots and changes to voter registration received by mail found great success due to the education process established. This process will continue as Utah implements new voting equipment by sending a voter information pamphlet to each household in Utah and through a statewide media campaign. Though Utah has seen three different Lieutenant Governor’s since the passage of HAVA, it has not lost a step in fulfilling its obligation. A voting equipment selection committee was established in 2004 and included County Officials, computer specialists, and members of the disability community. This committee created and reviewed the responses from the request for proposal and provided Lt. Governor Gary R. Herbert with the committee’s decision on the system that would best serve Utah. The committee also recommended making the voting solution a uniform statewide solution. The selection process spanned over a year and after this lengthy process the State of Utah has negotiated and signed a contract with Diebold Election Systems, Inc. to provide a statewide voting solution that meets the provisions of HAVA. In Addition Lt. Governor Gary R. Herbert met with all twenty nine counties in Utah to discuss the new solution and get the counties support for the decision. All twenty nine counties agreed to use the new voting equipment with twenty eight counties exclusively using DREs and one using precinct count optical scan with one DRE per polling location. The voting equipment and accessories were delivered to all twenty nine counties or their designees before the January first deadline. The State of Utah designed the required centralized voter registration database using the Utah Governor’s IT staff. The Voter Information System Tracking Application (VISTA) was created with input from County Clerks, and the Lt. Governor’s Office. Because the system was designed locally, revisions to the system can be made quickly, and support is provided by those who designed the system. The locally designed database cost about $500,000 and has saved the State of Utah thousands of dollars. All twenty-nine counties were live on the system prior to the January first deadline.

The State of Utah has always been supportive of military and overseas voters. Utah has made it easier for military and overseas voters to register and vote a ballot even though they might be far from their homes. Utah believes that its military families and overseas residents should have access to the ballot regardless of where they are deployed, or living abroad, and are continuing to make this process easier. Furthermore, Utah is responsive to the needs of the disability community. Utah with help from the Utah Disability Law Center has made strides to make the electoral process more open and independent for the disabled. The decision to provide DREs throughout Utah demonstrates steps to make voting more accessible and independent to citizens who have not been able to participate in the electoral process on their own. Also the grants provided through the United States Department of Health and Human Resources have also increased accessibility though construction of ramps, installation of accessible entry ways, auto door openers, and paving of gravel parking lots. Steps will continue to be made to provide more access to Utahns who have been hindered through disabilities in exercising their right to vote. Utah, like many other states, looks forward to the upcoming elections and is embracing this new and dynamic time for the electoral process. Virginia Statewide Voter Registration System (VERIS) While Virginia missed the January 1, 2006 deadline for HAVA compliance, DOJ was notified in September that the project was behind schedule. We are currently negotiating a contract amendment and expect to go live in mid August. Fortunately, we remain under budget and are confident that we will have a quality product at the end of the day. Provisional Ballots Virginia currently permits provisional voting (Code §24.2-653) that meets the requirements of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA). Provisional Voting has been permitted under Virginia law since 1975 but to bring Virginia procedures into full compliance, the state enacted several changes since the passage of HAVA: Developed the written information required under §302 (a)(5)(A) (42 USCS § 15482(a)(5)(A) Codified). This written information

provided the date, time, and location of the electoral board meeting the day after the election and the provisional voter’s right to be present and provide information at the determination of his or her vote. SBE distributes this information to the localities and posts it on the state’s web site.

Developed a free-access system by instituting a toll-free number. SBE upgraded the phone system to maintain this toll free number, which routes callers to their localities. Each provisional voter is provided the number and a code at the time the provisional ballot is cast. The voter then dials in on the toll free number, enters the assigned code and is transferred to the proper local registration office where the information on the disposition of provisional ballots is maintained. (§302(a)(5)(B)) (42 USCS § 15482(a)(5)(B) Codified)

SBE is in the process of ensuring the public access portion of the new election and statewide registration system, VERIS, will also serve as a free-access system for a provisional voter to verify if his or her provisional ballot was counted and if not, the reason why.

Developed and approved comprehensive provisional ballot procedures to achieve uniformity in the issuing, counting, and tracking of provisional ballots.

Engaged in extensive training of general registrars and electoral board members to ensure uniformity in the application of these procedures.

Legislation was submitted and passed in the 2004 General Assembly session to include new statutes applicable to HAVA such as voter’s voting after the polls have closed due to a court order and the treatment of an absentee ballot as a provisional ballot if it was returned without a photocopy of an applicable identification document if this was required.

Voting Equipment Each locality in the Commonwealth of Virginia was responsible for choosing a HAVA compliant voting system from the eight DREs and eight optical scan systems certified by state from six vendors. As of December 29, 2005, the State Board of Elections had received contracts from all 134 localities for their purchases of voting equipment. Ninety localities were required to replace their punchcard or lever machine voting systems and forty-four were required to purchase one ADA compliant voting system per precinct. Ninety-six localities used their HAVA voting systems in the November 2005 General Election. The State Board of Elections in conjunction with a private security firm prepared the “Voting Systems Policies, Standards, and Guidelines.” Regional training was held in July 2005 for local electoral board members, who were instructed on the preparation of their individual security programs based on this document. The state’s voting equipment certification procedures were updated to reflect security standards as well as HAVA requirements. Polling Place Accessibility Currently twenty of our 134 localities have been made fully compliant. There are another twenty-two that are in the process of removing accessibility barriers. The remaining localities are in the planning phases of barrier removal. While these totals are below our previous expectations, we remain confident that all polling places will be made accessible by the first federal election in 2006.

In the latest effort to reinvigorate locality commitment to polling place accessibility, our Accessibility Coordinator has begun to distribute a monthly e-newsletter. This newsletter includes information on progress across the state, congratulations to localities that have become fully compliant, local and national accessibility news, responses to questions, and a letter from a recognizable citizen further highlighting the importance of ensuring that all polling places in Virginia are accessible. Though this is a new effort, so far it has proven to be effective. Voter Education and Training The Virginia State Board of Elections, in an effort to comply with the provisions of HAVA and improve services to the citizens of the Commonwealth, has undertaken a number of successful initiatives in the area of voter education and training over the last year. This includes the institution of customized region based training for Electoral Board members, the launch of a new website with improved content, design, and a student section (www.sbe.virginia.gov), and the design and development of an Officer of Election training module specifically geared towards accessibility etiquette and awareness. Planning for additional initiatives has also begun and will include a New Registrar training manual (to be available in both hard copy and CD formats), a voter registration application that the voter can fill in online, print, sign, and return, and the development of public service announcements that emphasize registration deadlines and voting procedures over the traditional “go vote” message. UOCAVA In an effort to better serve our overseas citizens and bring Virginia into compliance with HAVA, the UOCAVA Coordinator at the State Board of Elections has created Virginia specific workshops for military Voting assistance officers stationed in Virginia, created Virginia specific workshops for organizations that support the military spouses and dependents, developed and designed pamphlet entitled “Virginia’s Guide to Voting Absentee for the Uniformed Citizen”, and developed the multi-state UOCAVA contact list-serve that was named as a “best practice” by the Federal Voting Assistance Program. In addition, the coordinator has increased participation in Virginia’s award winning email ballot program from 3 voters receiving their ballots by email in the November 2001 election to 2210 receiving their ballots by email in the November 2004 election, and successfully lobbied the Governor’s office to allow for the expansion of the current Emergency Absentee Voting Program to include any qualified Virginia voter stationed, living, visiting or engaged in disaster relief in parts of the Gulf region affected by Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita. Grievance Procedures The State Board instituted a formal grievance process for voters who felt that their rights were violated on Election Day or voters who may have witnessed an election law being broken. Additional information on the grievance procedures as well as the grievance form that starts the formal process can be found on our website at http://www.sbe.virginia.gov/cms/documents/ElectionDay-Complaint-Form.pdf. Recount On December 20-21, 2005 Virginia election officials conducted only the second statewide recount in state history, in our closest statewide election ever. Out of over 1.9 million votes cast for Attorney General, only 323 votes separated the two candidates in the official results. In the recount, the winner's margin improved to 360 votes. In 2001, the General Assembly made changes to the recount laws specifying what would constitute a vote on a punchcard ballot that is handcounted (2 corners detached), directing the State Board of Elections (SBE) to write Standards for Recounts, and directing recount courts and officials to abide by the State Board's Standards. Those Standards include a set of Ballot Examples for Handcounting paper ballots and optical scan ballots whenever they must be handcounted. These laws, Standards and Ballot Examples predate HAVA's requirement that each state define what constitutes a vote. The 2005 recount was the first widespread test of the state's Standards, and they generally met with success. Very few ballots were referred by local recount officials to the three-judge recount court in Richmond, and during the second day of the recount the opposing sides were able to reach agreement on almost all of those ballots by applying the Standards and Ballot Examples. (Both documents are available at www.sbe.virginia.gov under "Election Laws.") Washington The State of Washington received approximately $62.3 million in federal and state funds to implement HAVA and improve election administration in Washington State. After development of the State Plan, the Office of the Secretary of State (OSOS) hired a HAVA Coordinator to develop a county grant program and to establish internal controls of the HAVA funds. Of the $62.3 million available for implementing HAVA, Washington State divided in the funds into three categories:

• $30 million to meet HAVA legal requirements; • $20 million for counties for election improvements; and • $12.3 million HAVA administration and special projects

In accordance with the Washington State Plan, two levels of HAVA spending were established. The first was spending at the state level and the second was spending at the county level in the form of grants requests. Spending at the state level is governed by an internal workgroup that reviews all spending requests to assure compliance with HAVA and OMB circulars. Requests for spending range from costs associated with meeting the requirements of HAVA to general election improvements. Spending at the county level is governed by an Advisory Board appointed by Secretary of State Sam Reed. This Advisory Board is represented by three County Auditors, the Director of Elections and a former County Auditor. During the development of the county grant program, $20 million was set aside for the counties for general election improvements. This is in addition to the nearly $25 million granted to the counties to meet HAVA legal requirements. Because 34 of the 39 counties in our state have changed to vote by mail, many costs associated with implementing HAVA requirements were not incurred. The cost savings generated from reducing the number of poll sites throughout the state allowed our counties the opportunity to apply for and receive full grants without the need for matching funds. Funds were granted for the following:

• Voter Registration Database. Washington State implemented its $6 million voter registration database on time and on budget. Washington State has moved from 39 different voter registration databases to one centralized state database. The centralized database has resulted in improved voter registration management for felons, duplicates, deceased, and other voters.

• Punch Card Replacement. Sixteen Washington counties have replaced punch card voting systems with HAVA approved systems.

• Election Management Systems. Most counties in Washington have upgraded election management systems with HAVA funds. Formerly, some counties were literally using a file card system for voters. These new modern election managements systems have dramatically improved accountability in local elections.

• Voter Education and Outreach. Many counties are instituting for the first time voter education programs concerning voting procedures, voting rights and voting technology. The state and counties have coordinated extensive voter education campaigns via television, radio, web, and print materials.

• Disability Access Units. All counties have received approved grants to purchase disability voting devices in accordance with Section 251 of HAVA.

• Access Improvements for Voters with Disabilities. Sixteen counties have received grants that improve access to the poll site for individuals with disabilities. These grants vary from signage, automatic door hardware, paving and painting accessible parking stalls, stalls, handrails, chair lifts and elevators.

• County Education Fund. The county education fund policy created an allotment of $406,000 for use by counties to access necessary training and education that will improve the administration of elections.

• General Election Improvements. Using Section 101 funds, many counties received grants for training equipment, such as laptop computers and PowerPoint projectors. Others were awarded grants for equipment to help accurately and expeditiously get absentee ballots to the voters as required by state and federal law.

• Free Access. Grant funds have been awarded to set up access for provisional voters to be informed of the outcome of their provisional ballot.

West Virginia West Virginia faced many challenges as did all states as it relates to becoming compliant with the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). First and foremost, however, is simply that the process to purchase machines had not been started for various reasons, most notably a change of administrations in January 2005. When Secretary of State Betty Ireland was elected and eventually took office on January 17, 2005, she immediately made becoming HAVA compliant the top priority of the office. Although she had already devised her blueprint for HAVA compliance, she had to wait until the close of the 2005 West Virginia Legislative regular session to begin a vendor search, since a voter verified paper trail bill was introduced in the session and was not signed into law until midnight on May 4, 2005. As other states have voiced, West Virginia did not have the necessary funds to easily transition into HAVA compliance. With many rural areas, many West Virginia counties are struggling financially. West Virginia faced the problem of developing a plan of action which was financially fair to each county. A third challenge West Virginia faced was time, since Secretary Ireland had less than one year to become compliant with HAVA. It was a difficult balance between expediency and efficiency when crafting a plan, executing the plan, and implementing the new voting machines.

The Plan: West Virginia is made up of 55 counties, each with unique financial, political, and socioeconomic environments. It was vital to Secretary Ireland to come up with a plan that did three things: 1) meet the requirements of HAVA; 2) take the financial burden of becoming compliant off the counties as much as possible; and 3) give the counties options as to the type of voting system they want. Secretary Ireland chose to purchase one handicap-accessible touch screen voting machine per precinct at no cost to the counties. Further, counties could receive, at no cost, an optical scan voting system for the remainder of the counties’ voting machine needs. Lastly, however, if counties chose to purchase an all electronic touch-screen system or any other HAVA compliant system above the no-cost plan, the Secretary of State applied a credit equal to the no-cost optical scan system with one touch-screen per precinct to their purchase and the counties would have to pay the difference. Counties that chose to purchase more than the no-cost option could borrow up to half of the total cost of the system from the zero percent interest HAVA Revolving Loan Fund set up by the state legislature. The Secretary of State’s office discussed with each county the specifics of the plan for several months following to ensure their understanding their options. Secretary Ireland herself visited as many county clerks and commissioners as possible to ensure their understanding. The plan called for the Secretary of State to craft the statewide request for proposal and each county then had to choose its voting systems from the winning bidder. But during the process of educating county election officials, the Secretary took some criticism for not speeding up the process. However, Secretary Ireland did not sacrifice efficiency for speed. In the end the state needed quality voting machines which complied with HAVA and the office did not waiver from that stance. It eventually took several months to craft the official RFP. The Request for Proposal (RFP): After Secretary Ireland introduced her plan for HAVA compliance in March 2005, she convened a committee made up of county election officials, technology experts, representatives of the disability community, and staff members of the Secretary of State’s office to help guide the process of drafting the RFP. Again, it was vital to get the input of the counties and other stakeholders during the entire process. The RFP took time to draft for two reasons: 1) stringent purchasing laws in West Virginia, and 2) making the RFP technically correct. Each HAVA requirement had to be taken into consideration; additionally, suggestions from the committee members had to be weighed. The committee soon realized that the requirement for extensive support from the winning bidder regarding education and implementation would most probably carry huge weight in the bidding and procurement process. After several drafts the official RFP was issued on July 15, 2005. The Secretary set out an aggressive schedule for completion of the bidding process and personally stayed in contact with the state’s purchasing division to ensure compliance with the timeline. Three vendors responded to the request: Election Systems & Software (ES&S), Hart Intercivic, and Diebold. The bidding process took exactly two months for completion. On August 15, 2005, ES&S was awarded the statewide contract to provide all of West Virginia’s counties with its voting machines. Counties’ Choices: Once the contract was awarded Secretary Ireland gave the counties until October 15, 2005, to make choose whether they wanted an optical scan or touch screen system, or a combination thereof. Representatives from the Secretary of State’s office and ES&S visited and/or sent information on the voting systems to each county so they could make an informed decision. In conjunction with ES&S, Secretary Ireland held a series of regional voting machine demonstrations from October 3rd through the 7th for county officials. Each county made its selection and submitted its request by the deadline. The following describes the counties’ selections:

• 33 counties chose to use the iVotronic voting system • 20 counties chose an optical scan voting systems with the M-650 central counting machines, and of these 20…

o 17 utilized the iVotronic for their handicap-accessible machines o 3 utilized the AutoMARK for their handicap-accessible machine

• 2 counties chose to remain with the paper ballot system with one iVotronic per precinct for their handicap-accessible machines.

Delivery and Implementation: After the county decisions were in, the Secretary of State’s office and ES&S developed a delivery and implementation plan. On December 7, 2005, West Virginia received its first shipment of voting machines. Accordingly to the plan, every voting machine was delivered to a central warehouse in Charleston, West Virginia, for testing before delivery to the counties. Each machine went through a thorough and stringent acceptance testing procedure. Each machine was tested by at least 3 persons: a representative from each ES&S, the Secretary of State’s office, and the county clerk’s office. Once a

county’s allotment of machines was tested, the machines were shipped to the county. West Virginia’s voting machines were in place by the December 31, 2005 deadline. Education: West Virginia is in the process of conducting an extensive statewide voter education effort to better prepare the voters for the upcoming election. The initiative is being conducted in conjunction with the county clerks and ES&S. The initiative is separated into three areas of focus:

• Awareness - Make the citizens of West Virginia aware of the fact that they have new voting machines. Awareness will help reduce the “shock factor” when voters enter their polling place on Election Day. If voters know they have new machines, the chances are they will be more proactive in learning how the machines work.

• Outreach - The Secretary of State’s office in conjunction with each county clerk will identify and build relationships with organizations to help with the education effort. Outreach will facilitate the transfer of “ownership” of the new voting machines to the citizens. West Virginians from all groups need to take a leadership role in facilitating the education process.

• Education - The Secretary of State’s office in conjunction with each county clerk and partnering organizations will educate the citizenry on how to use the new voting machines. Through public demonstrations and distribution of educational material, the citizens will learn, step by step, how to use the new voting machines.

Each area of focus is supplemented by three actions: 1) utilization of the media and paid advertising; 2) grassroots efforts; and 3) public demonstrations. Through a true team effort in attempting to reach every citizen, West Virginia is moving forward and generally excited to be utilizing new voting equipment in the upcoming May, 2006 Primary Election. Attachments:

• Voting Machine Timeline for West Virginia • Secretary of State Betty Ireland’s plan for HAVA compliance

Voting Machine Timeline

• January 17, 2005: Made it #1 office goal to become HAVA compliant • May 4, 2005: WV’s governor signed into law the bill requiring a VVAPT for all electronic voting machines • March 14, 2005: Introduced plan for HAVA compliance at the Association of Counties’ annual meeting (explain) • April through June: Convened committee of county clerks, technology experts, and election experts to craft the Request for

Proposal (RFP) for new machines • April through June: Educated counties as to the plan for HAVA compliance • July 15, 2005: Official RFP for new voting machines was issued by the State’s Purchasing Division • August 2005: Educate the public as to the reason for HAVA, further education to counties as to HAVA plan to assist when

they need to make their decisions • August 2005: RFP scoring committee interviewed vendors and tested voting machines • September 15, 2005: State Purchasing Division awarded voting machine contract to Omaha, Nebraska-based Election

Systems & Software (“ES&S”). • October 3 - 7, 2005: Secretary of State hosted series of regional voting machine demonstrations to assist counties with their

decisions • October 15, 2005: Deadline for counties to make decision of voting system • October and November 2005: Finalized planning strategies, contracts, and purchase order with ES&S • December 7 - 31, 2005: Machines arrive at central warehouse in Charleston, tested and shipped to counties. • January through April, 2006: Conduct extensive voter education effort in conjunction with the counties. • May 9, 2006: Primary Election

WEST VIRGINIA/HAVA FACT SHEET I. The Program

The Secretary of State’s Office will make available HAVA funding to provide each county with an optical scan system. This program essentially contemplates that no participating county will have to come up with its own funds to meet HAVA requirements, by providing the following to each participating county.

one handicap-accessible electronic (touch screen or other methodology) voting machine (hardware & software) and booth per precinct, plus certain incidental costs

one extra computer per county for election night tabulation one high speed central optical counter per county (hardware & software), plus a 5-year warranty and licensing fees, plus

certain incidental costs a supply of optical scan ballots for one statewide election cycle (up to a certain maximum amount) voting booths for optical scan voting education and training programs for county clerks and staff, poll workers, and voters certain other educational materials and efforts

II. Other Facts Those counties that currently utilize electronic (touch screen) voting systems and wish to keep them will receive funding for

certified upgrades and retrofitting (to provide paper trails) of existing machines (in addition to the one handicap-accessible machine per county), in an amount comparable to what their funding would have been had they chosen to change to the optical scan program.

Those counties that choose to keep their current punch card or lever machines will irrevocably lose all HAVA Sec. 102 funding (it will be returned to the federal government), with the exception of what it will take to acquire the handicap-accessible machines. Further, these counties will be required to pay for their own massive voter education programs, as mandated by HAVA.

Any county that wishes to purchase the optional and additional optical scanners for precincts (to scan for over- and under-voting at the precinct level), may borrow up to one-half the cost of such machines from the HAVA Revolving Loan Fund at zero % interest, over a 5 year term.

Any county that wishes to go to an all-electronic voting system (touch screen or other methodology) may do so. However, that county will receive direct HAVA funding equal to only that amount that would have been expended on its behalf to convert to an optical scan system under this program, which includes the allotted cost of the handicap-accessible machines. It may utilize the funds in the HAVA Revolving Loan Fund, on a basis as yet to be determined.

It is anticipated that the HAVA Revolving Loan Fund will be in existence for the foreseeable future, so that future needs for upgrades and maintenance will be met.

The Secretary of State’s Office will write emergency rules to specify the methodology for all HAVA compliance in the spring 2005; the RFP for voting machines is targeted to be sent out by mid-summer 2005.

Wyoming The State of Wyoming continues to proceed toward implementation of HAVA. Computerized, Statewide Voter Registration List: Wyoming, along with most other states, has been plowing through the long process of designing, developing, testing and soon deploying the statewide voter registration system. All of this came with the assistance of a voter registration work group, which consisted of county clerks, county election officials, technology staff and Secretary of State staff. We chose a vendor in the fall of 2003 and began implementation of a computerized, statewide voter registration and election management system in February 2004. Wyoming’s contract with Accenture is an end-to-end contract meaning that Accenture has purchased and installed equipment in all counties, will continue to provide training for all county and state users, will host the software and data base at a central location, will provide for a failover hosting site, will provide for all system security and will provide maintenance and help desk services through February 2009. All counties will use the same software. Data will be inputted at the county, but will not be housed at the county. Rather, the data will be immediately transmitted via secure encryption utilizing Citrix Metaframe client, via the Internet, to the central hosting site, or in case of an emergency to the failover hosting site. In order to perform the required HAVA checks, the statewide data base will interface with the Wyoming Department of Transportaiton, Divisions of Criminal Investigation, Board of Parole, and Department of Health Vital Records Division. The vendor, Accenture e-Democracy Services, completed the on-site technical survey of all 23 counties. Designs for interfacing with the Department of Transportation, Division of Vital Records, Division of Criminal Investigation and the Board of Parole are complete. The design and programming for conversion of county voter registration and election management information is nearly complete. Purchasing and configuration of hosting site equipment is complete and ready for the software to be deployed in the 23 counties in Wyoming. Upon completion and configuration of the software package, intensive testing of the product was done and roll out schedules are finalized. Wyoming chose to deploy the statewide system in two phases. The plan was to begin training for the Phase 1 counties the week of September 12th. However, in consultation with the county clerks, the Secretary of State’s Office made the decision to hold off on training until the program was more polished. Although all of us who were working on this project would have loved to have it behind us, we were committed to not dropping a system on the counties until it was reasonably ready to go, knowing also that there will be continued upgrades over the life of the product, as is true of all systems. Obviously, by holding off on rollout, all counties did not go live on the system by January 1st. The Secretary of State has addressed the Department of Justice regarding this issue, and our office felt that working with them is infinitely better than forcing a system on the counties before it was appropriate to do so. The counties in Phase 1 have been trained and continue to practice in the practice environment until they are scheduled to “Go Live” February 13th. The counties in Phase 2 are scheduled for training on the system beginning February 9th with a “Go Live” date of March

13th. The plan is for the whole state to be on the system and using the system completely by the first of April 2006. The voter registration workgroup, Secretary of State’s Office and Accenture continue to work in partnership on this project. Voting Systems: Once again the Wyoming Secretary of State partnered with the Wyoming County Clerks Association. In addition, a Public Overview Committee was established by the Secretary of State to provide public input and public transparency to the equipment and voting system selection process. The Public Overview Committee had representation from the League of Women Voters, the media, County Commissioners Association, major political parties, senior citizens, the military, Protection and Advocacy Services, Inc. In January ‘05 all voting equipment vendors which had equipment certified by the National Association of State Election Directors (NASED) were invited to a vendor fair at which they could display equipment and make a presentation. Five vendors chose to attend. All twenty-three county clerks were represented at the event. Following this event, all county clerks determined which vendor could best meet their county’s needs. Twenty counties chose Election Systems & Services (ES&S) and three counties chose Diebold Inc. In the few months following their selection, the state followed up with each company gathering information for due diligence. The state also obtained feedback from those individuals who had served on the state’s Voting System Overview Committee as well as the state’s primary groups representing the disability community. The state contracted with both companies. The contract with ES&S was completed before the end of September and equipment was deployed and tested prior to January 1, 2006. The contract with Diebold was finalized and the equipment was delivered prior to January 1, 2006. The twenty counties who selected ES&S equipment will use optical scan voting equipment and the AutoMark. The counties who chose Diebold will use optical scan equipment and the Diebold DRE. Each of the twenty three counties received a memorandum of understanding which enabled the Secretary of State’s Office to transfer title of the systems to the counties. Voter Education, Election Official Training and Poll Worker Training: There are many types of training to be conducted to meet HAVA requirements. The contract for the statewide voter registration system included a provision for training of those individuals who will be using the system. The contracts for the voting systems for the counties also include provisions for training staff and poll workers. In addition, the voting system contracts require the voting system vendors to provide the state with the materials for education of the voting public. Additional aspects of Wyoming’s HAVA progress: Wyoming initially received $100,000 Health and Human Services, Election Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities (HHS-EAID ) funds. All of the projects funded with those funds are complete. The state has now been approved for the third allotment of $100,000. Applications for those funds are available and projects funded with “Round 3" monies are anticipated to be underway by spring, completed by summer ‘06. Although not a required part of a state’s HAVA plan, Wyoming chose to address the issue of universal access to voting. As stated in the original plan, “The State of Wyoming values the participation of its citizens in the election process. Therefore, Wyoming commits to assuring that all citizens, including those with disabilities, can fully participate in the election process by casting their ballots confidentially and independently.” Wyoming Protection & Advocacy System, Inc. (P&A) and the Governor’s Council on Development Disabilities have been helpful in assisting the state in this regard. Requirements Payments and Fund Management: Wyoming was a "minimum funded" state under HAVA and therefore was scheduled to receive $20 million in federal Title I and Title II funds. To date, Wyoming has received approximately $16.6 million. The State of Wyoming appropriated the full state match of $750,000 in anticipation of receipt of the federal dollars. To date, approximately $580,000 has been used to match the federal funds received. Wyoming has obligated $8.8 million for the contract for a statewide voter registration system and contracted with the two companies for voting systems for the twenty three Wyoming counties, for a cost of $6.3 million. As we anticipated and stated in the original plan, and is still true today, "Implementation of such an enormous project will evolve over time; we must address the far-reaching ramifications detail-by-detail and decision-by-decision. Full implementation of the vision will take shape day by day."