Disabilities Access and Voting Systems Task Force
of HAVA State Plan Committee
Minutes of First Meeting
I. Date & time: March 14, 2003
9 AM – 12 Noon
II. Location: Room 308
Legislative Office Building
III. Attendance:
Task force participants: Ross Doehr (NH Association of the Blind); Orville Fitch (Department of Justice); Gary Gilmore (Supervisor of Checklist, Dover); Christine Hanisco (NH Disabilities Rights Council); Carol Nadeau (Governor’s Commission on Disability); Trisha Piecuch (Manchester City Clerk’s Office); Charity Ross (House Democratic Leaders Office); David Scanlan (Deputy Secretary of State); Anthony Stevens (Assistant Secretary of State); Clyde Terry (Granite State Independent Living [GSIL]); Peter Thomson (Town Moderator, Orford);Terry Voth (GSIL); Sally Davis
IV. Business:
The objective of the meeting was to develop a draft of the mission, vision, goals, and objectives for the portion of HAVA dealing with disabilities access and voting systems.
Provide that all voters in the State of New Hampshire have an equal right to participate in the voting process. An equal right to participation means the ability to enter the polling place easily and independently and to mark a ballot independently and privately.
The voting system and polling place shall be accessible for individuals with disabilities, including nonvisual accessibility for the blind and visually impaired, in a manner that provides the same opportunity for access and participation (including privacy and independence) as for other voters.
Comply with the federal constitution, federal statute, state constitution, and state laws that address accessibility.
New Hampshire should be a model for the nation in the area of voter participation.
The following goals and objectives shall be accomplished at least by the timelines established in law and sooner if possible.
Goals are general ends – broad statements of policy.
Objectives are specific measurable outcomes.
1) Achieve voting system accessibility by January 1, 2006
a) Have at least one direct recording electronic voting machine (system that allows a voter with disabilities to independently cast a secret ballot) at each polling place.
b) Educate policy makers as to exactly what is being talked about and involve them in purchasing decisions.
c) Complete cost assessment – DRE machine at small towns versus telephone based interactive device centrally located serving multiple towns.
d) A voting process that ensures that the user of a DRE’s vote is private and secret (i.e. if the output of the device is a paper ballot, the process at the polling place requires that sufficient voters use the DRE so that where the character of the ballot identifies that ballot came from the DRE, it would not identify an individual voter.) 10 of each type ballot including 10 of each major party as a standard.
e) Clear notification to users of over votes or under votes
f) A device that permits the voter to verify the vote selected
g) Permit the voter the opportunity to change the ballot.
h) If the voter selects more than one candidate for a single office or more candidates than seats exist in a multiple seat race:
i) Notify the voter what he or she had done.
ii) Notify the voter about the effect of what he or she has done.
iii) Provide the opportunity to change the above.
i) Determine who should purchase the equipment and how does it get to the local polling place.
i) Article 28-a of the NH constitution (preventing state from mandating programs or responsibilities that would necessitate additional local expenditures unless fully funded by the state):
(1) State acquires
(2) State distributes to the towns and cities
(3) Provision is made for maintenance
(4) Memorandum of agreement between State and Towns/Cities
ii) Ownership issues
iii) Maintenance costs
2) Ensure the accessibility of each polling place by the Presidential primary for the 2004 elections.
a) Survey the accessibility of every polling place in New Hampshire during the fall of 2003.
i) Task force will develop a draft RFP for the SOS to get bids for completing a statewide survey.
b) Submit a grant request to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for funds to improve accessibility. ($13 million appropriated nationally in 2003.)
c) Cooperation from town and local officials –
i) Letter from the Attorney General
ii) Invite representatives of municipal government to the next Task Force Meeting.
iii) Address changing polling places – try to survey the sites to be used in the future.
d) Establish the criteria for the distribution of funds.
e) Establish the ownership of the materials funded.
f) Future monitoring of compliance.
3) Education of local election officials. Options include:
a) Work with the governor’s commission to develop educational tools
b) Weekly newspaper articles and other media
c) Tools for local election officials – checklist for Selectmen/Moderators to ensure that the polling place is accessible.
d) Provide contact information for Election Day problems that arise.
e) Notification system that allows a person in the parking lot to alert election officials that they need assistance with entering the polling place. (Staffing the parking area.)
f) Training tool for law enforcement working polling places.
g) Fail-safe backup and phone number for voting system – how to find it.
h) Assured vendor support on Election Day, with toll-free number.
i) Formal training and incentives for poll workers and election officials on operation, troubleshooting voting systems, and counting the result.
j) Video training, manuals
4) Education of voters with disabilities regarding their rights, and the existence and use of voting machines. Potential venues include:
a) Public service announcements.
b) Mock elections, trials in libraries, schools, malls, assisted living facilities, and nursing homes, and access expo.
c) Community publications