October 16, 2007

"State accuses voting machine firm of selling an unapproved model"

A voting machine company already under fire for potential ballot counting problems in San Francisco is fighting a possible $9.7 million fine from the state for allegedly selling uncertified voting equipment to San Francisco, Solano, Marin, Merced and Colusa counties.

At a hearing Tuesday, officials from the secretary of state's office accused Nebraska-based Election Systems & Software of selling 972 of its AutoMARK A200 voting machines in California, even though only an earlier version, the A100, had been approved for use by the state.

While the company has admitted selling the machines to the five counties, it argues that the machines did not need to be certified because they were modified versions of the older certified model, and that the changes in the newer model had no effect on how votes were recorded. State election law, however, requires written notification of any change in any voting equipment, said Lowell Finley, deputy secretary of state for voting systems.

"The vendor may be confident that the changes are inconsequential, but that decision is not for the vendor to make," he said.

In the next few weeks, Secretary of State Debra Bowen will decide whether to file suit against the company for what could be a huge amount of damages. The state could fine ES&S up to $10,000 for each of the 972 machines sold in California and order them to refund the estimated $5 million the counties paid for the disputed machines.

The state also could decertify the AutoMARK system for use in the state and ban ES&S from doing business in California for up to three years, prospects that worry local election officials.
The AutoMARK machines have worked well and are desperately needed for upcoming elections, said Elaine Ginnold, Martin County's registrar of voters.

"We borrowed (A100s) from Contra Costa County to use in the November election, but we won't be able to (borrow) them for the Feb. 5 primary," she told the panel of officials from the secretary of state's office. "You have to find a way to allow the five counties to use the AutoMARK 200s in February."

The AutoMARKs are designed to allow blind and otherwise disabled voters to cast ballots without outside assistance. Unlike the more controversial touch-screen systems, the AutoMARKs are used only to mark paper ballots and do not count or electronically store votes.

Counties that use the AutoMARK typically have one of the machines in every precinct because new federal election rules require that disabled voters have equal access to polling places.
An ES&S executive urged state officials not to penalize the company for a problem that was at most a matter of misunderstood communications.

"The company has acted in good faith," said John Groh, an ES&S vice president. "We have always complied with what we understood to be the practices and procedures relating to certification."
The differences between the two AutoMARK models were just minor fixes designed to make the machines easier to manufacture and service, he said, adding that the company always believed that California and other states have not required notification of those changes, which had been certified on the federal level.

Groh also argued that the state had approved the use of the modified AutoMARKs when it allowed San Francisco to use the disputed AutoMARK machines in last November's election.
But ES&S never told the city - or the state - that San Francisco had received the A200s, said John Arntz, the city's election chief.

"All the documentation ES&S provided stated that we had the A100, not the A200," he said. "I had no idea we were using different machines."

Posted by Randy Riddle at October 16, 2007 07:35 AM