Board delays 3rd Blackwell-mandated decision on voting machines 
2005-05-12 
By Nick Claussen 
Athens NEWS 
 

The Athens County Board of Elections delayed its decision on new voting machines for the county on Wednesday, and voted to ask the Athens County Commissioners for extra funding to buy the machines.

The Board of Elections already has voted twice on voting machines, after Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell mandated both votes. After each vote, though, Blackwell changed the requirements on the voting machines and opened the process up again.

Counties across Ohio currently have until May 24 to decide on which voting machines they want to use. Counties can choose between an optical-scan machine from Diebold Elections Systems, Inc., an optical-scan machine from Election Systems and Software, and an electronic touch-screen machine from Diebold.

The board's original choice was the Diebold touch-screen machine and the second choice was the Diebold optical-scan machine. The second vote ended in a tie with board members Susan Gwinn and William Lavelle voting for the Elections Systems and Software optical-scan machine and board members Richard Mottl and Howard Stevens voting for the Diebold optical-scan machine.

Gwinn said during the Wednesday meeting that she was worried that the state will not provide funding for enough machines and that the board would have to ask the county commissioners for that funding.

The state is providing funding for 240 machines, Gwinn said, adding that the county has around 400 punch-card ballot machines for use in the November presidential election.

Each electronic touch-screen machine costs $2,700, and Gwinn suggested the need for funding for 100 to 160 extra machines. That would require $270,000 for 100 machines, and $432,000 for 160 machines.

The board eventually voted to meet with the commissioners during their regular meeting on Tuesday to discuss different possibilities for funding. The commissioners have been operating under a tight budget, but Stevens said that they could possibly borrow money to help with the machines. He added that the commissioners have told him in the past that they would try to help the board with whatever is needed for fair elections in the county.

Mottl asked Gwinn how she came up with the need for 100 or 160 extra machines, and said he plans to examine voting figures to come up with his own estimates for how many voting machines are needed. He added that the state already came up with one figure, and that's why the state is providing the 240 machines for the county.

Gwinn responded that the state's figure is likely based on what state officials thought they could afford.

Mottl said that optical-scan machines may be less expensive to start with, but the board would end up paying extra costs for paper ballots and other expenses. He spoke in favor of the electronic touch-screen machines. Stevens also indicated that he favors them, though he is concerned about the cost.

Gwinn said that without funding for extra machines, she favors the optical-scan machines. Lavelle did not indicate a preference.

In order to make such an important decision, Gwinn said the board needs to try to set up a time to have members of the public try the new machines and give their input. No other board members gave much support to this idea, partially because the May 24 deadline is looming, so no demonstration day was set up.

Gwinn also said that state officials have discussed eliminating the requirement for the paper receipts for the electronic touch-screen machines. She said that many members of the public do not trust the new machines, and she does not think the county should choose a machine if it does not have paper receipts.

"I disagree," responded Mottl.

The board will have to meet again before May 24 to decide on the new voting machines, but the members did not set a meeting date on Wednesday.