County Clerk
Comments
X. Comments from Sudy Group Members
The following chart illustrates the ranking by study group members of each option presented in the report. Because members ranked preferences from 1 to 4, with 1 being first choice and 4 being last choice, the option below with the lowest score (Option #1) represents the group's first choice and recommendation.
|
|
First Name |
Last Name |
Option 1 |
Option 2 |
Option 3 |
Option 4 |
|
1. |
Betty |
Brown* |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
2. |
Nan |
Clayton |
1 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
|
3. |
Carey |
Dietert |
2 |
1 |
3 |
4 |
|
4. |
Rowland |
Greenwade** |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
5. |
Zoe |
Griffith |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
6. |
Greg |
Hartman |
3 |
4 |
1 |
2 |
|
7. |
Len |
Hause |
1 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
|
8. |
Katherine |
Hinson |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
9. |
Tom |
Kokas |
1 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
|
10. |
Mike |
Krzywonski |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
11. |
Dolores |
Lopez |
1 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
|
12. |
Annette |
Lovoi |
3 |
4 |
1 |
2 |
|
13. |
Mac |
McGuire*** |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
14. |
Jim |
McNabb |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
15. |
Melinda |
Nickless |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
16. |
Pat |
O'Grady |
2 |
3 |
1 |
4 |
|
17. |
Karin |
Richmond |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
18. |
Patti |
Shields |
2 |
1 |
4 |
3 |
|
19. |
Pat |
Steele |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
20. |
Don |
Warren |
3 |
4 |
1 |
2 |
|
21. |
Gerard |
Washington |
2 |
3 |
1 |
4 |
|
|
|
Totals |
28 |
50 |
41 |
61 |
* Although an active participant in the Study Group, the City of Austin missed the deadline for providing comments.
** See Mr. Greenwade's comments below.
*** See Mr. McGuire's comments in Appendix B.
Other Comments:
Annette Lovoi, Texas Appleseed: "It has been a great pleasure to serve on the 1999 Election Study Group. I found the composition of the group to be representative of the many disciplines with knowledge and opinions on the subject of elections policy and equipment.
"I believe that Travis County must address the issue of acquiring a partial or full new elections system now, in order to address the issue of timeliness of results. If we don't act now, we may face difficulties in future elections, including the important upcoming presidential election. As our community is growing, we are going through a period of transition. It is incumbent upon us, as advisors to the county, to point to the need for new equipment as the underpinning of a quality election system that can carry our county into the future."
Patti Shields, Election Judge, Central Counting Station Presiding Judge: "As a temporary election employee that has worked in nearly all areas of the election process -- early voting clerk, precinct clerk, precinct assistant judge, precinct judge, poll watcher, worker in most of the areas at central counting station (including presiding judge) and even a stint [as a temporary employee] in the office of elections before and after the election -- I have personally experienced the dynamics of conducting an election in Travis County. I can emphatically state that the county clerk, all of her election staff and the majority of the temporary employees work as hard as humanly possible to bring in election results in a timely manner. It has become necessary to bring in more sophisticated technology to assist with the increasing demands of the election process.
"With my vote, I want to express my strong support for becoming current with the use [of] voting technology. To be prudent with our funds, I recommend phasing in the use of this technology-but we must start now."
Carey Dietert, Dell: "We need to make the recommendation that solves the stated problem, regardless of cost. To my way of thinking, that means a fully computerized voting system that eliminates (for all practical purposes) paper ballots for early and election day voting. As I stated in the last meeting I was able to attend, we should challenge the commissioners court... i.e. do they really want election returns in by 10pm? If they do, this is what it will cost...
"If not, the other options present some viability to improve, but not solve the current situation. To recommend a solution that doesn't solve the problem, simply in the interest of political expediency or based on some preconceived budget constraints, is, I believe, not effective and more confusing than enlightening. Rather, base the decision on sound reasoning, solid research, and valid cost estimates, and present it with conviction and confidence.
"It's imperative that we make the point that the other three [options] don't address the problems. The words are in the document -- I'd like to make sure that point is made in person."
Editor's Note: The other three options do address the problems, but not as effectively as DREs.
Zoe Griffith, Austin Independent School District: "Since funding is a concern and since we still need to climb up a new learning curve, I recommend that we first focus on early voting and eliminate the paper ballot. I think this will go a long way in improving efficiency. I also believe it is a way to introduce our voters to a new system (or systems). Voters should be made aware of new technology during early voting and encouraged to vote early in order to become familiar with the technology."
Greg Hartman, MGT of America, Inc.: "My first comment on the recommendations is that I still wish we had some language...that allows for consideration and negotiations surrounding a lease and/or lease/purchase financial agreement with the vendors. This technology is still evolving so rapidly, and is still at such an early stage in its development that I believe that is a financing option that we should be pursuing more aggressively. It does not surprise me that the vendors don't like that option -- I would not expect them to offer it as an option, unless pressured to do so. I also believe that there are ways to make a lease financing option attractive to the county, even when considering revenue source and management issues.
"Nevertheless, I think the task force...did admirable work, and we have presented some very viable, well thought-out and important recommendations."
Roland Greenwade, Texas State Comptroller's Office:
"Further, there is an article in the NY Times today which reports that "a handful of companies are building systems to enable voters to cast ballots over the Internet. But since no state allows Internet voting the companies are focusing on building the trust of election officials in their products. While the article...indicates it may be 5 years before Internet voting is ready for adoption, I think we need to evaluate the future of Internet voting and what it might do to reduce costs."
May 13 - "Reluctantly, I cannot support any of the recommended options. In an ideal situation, we would go to all DREs. But this is currently too expensive. This does not mean that the paperless DRE is not the wave of the future. In this case, I do not see that it is advisable to spend any money on PBCs to enhance our paper ballot capabilities.
"I think the committee did a lot of good work, but maybe the most important aspect of our deliberations will be educational -- to let the commissioners court and community know what should and eventually can be done.
"To this end, maybe the court would support spending the $600,000 for early voting DREs as a way to begin to allow voters to become familiar with this technology. But...I cannot recommend any of [the options] at the current time."
Editor's Note: Depending on the vendor, prices for DRE voting systems range from $600,000 - $1,315,000. In addition, the vast majority of Travis County polling locations do have accessibility to telephone lines to modem results to a central computer.
Karin Richmond, Richmond & Associates: "After reviewing the final draft, I come to one particular conclusion. The whole question of what to do strikes me as boiling down to time vs. money. If the commissioners court believe that the Travis County voting public wants accurate results before the 10 PM telecast, then the court has to break down and invest a significant sum in acquiring the equipment to do so. (I urge all our public bodies to fashion a joint venture so the burden will not be so onerous on any one taxing jurisdiction.) Our current process and equipment simply cannot do the job. If timeliness is not a high priority, then stick with the current system for a while. But I fear even then, the final vote count will slowly wander into later and later results.
"When ramping up to technological change, we all cringe at the cost, but most often we are extremely pleased with the results. We are at a technological watershed, and I believe that keeping our current system is tantamount to slipping backwards. And Austin, along with Travis County, is a very savvy and technically literate community which deserves a likewise advanced --and hey, I'll say it -- cool voting system! Maybe a whiz bang system will finally get the people to actually vote!"
- return to Other Options
- continue on to Glossary
