The state Little Hoover Commission held a public hearing in July to explore issues related to voting security, including new technology, the perspective of county officials and the California Secretary of State’s Office, and accessibility hurdles for those with disabilities.
"It is ... important to understand that security concerns must be balanced with other fundamental voting system principles, especially accessibility," Kenneth Bennett, a program manager the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk's Office, wrote in his testimony for the July 26 hearing. "Recognizing that there are tradeoffs between security and accessibility, security and performance, or security and usability, is critical. It is in finding the right balance of these principles where voters’ trust and confidence in voting systems and democratic processes is maximized."
Noel Runyan, primary consultant of Personal Data Systems, offered written testimony of struggles that disabled Californians face in using voting equipment. Within his testimony, Runyan detailed his experience with a Sequoia Voting Machine used by Santa Clara County in June's primary election. Runyan says that “distracting noises such as a fire truck engines starting up” at the polling place made it difficult to hear the audio ballot, which is typically used by blind voters.
Within his testimony, Runyan suggested that as the state moves toward increasing vote-by-mail policies, “counties may soon not be required to have accessible-voting-only machines in every polling place.” Because voters with disabilities may not have the necessary technology to vote within their homes, Runyan predicts that “counties may need to supply some accessible voting systems in vote centers and other physically accessible centers.”
Runyan also states that disabled voters have reported problems with Sequoia voting machines to Santa Clara County and other counties. Although they have voiced concerns about audio notifications related to the Sequoia machines, Runyan notes that Santa Clara County has not fixed the problem.
According to Los Angeles County's Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk, Dean Logan, Los Angeles County is looking to develop accessibility features such as:
- Screen contrast
- Audio ballots
- Tactile keypads
- Fully movable touchscreens
- Vote-by-mail software
Dominion Voting, which owns both Premier and Sequoia voting equipment, operates voting accessibility machines in 69 percent or 40 counties within the state. Election Systems and Software (ES&S) operates in 19 percent or 11 counties; Hart operates in seven counties.
As displayed in the figure above, counties have begun moving away from accessibility solutions provided by Sequoia and Premier. Counties such as Inyo and Kern have moved from using Sequoia or Premier systems to systems built by Dominion.
Alpine and Sierra counties are using the Premier AccuVote-TSX v. 4.6.4. system. According to publicly available documents, this system is available only in central county election offices because the two counties are not required to establish polling locations.
Earlier this year, the federal government released $380 million in funding through the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) to address the nation's electoral infrastructure. California received $34 million to assist with “activities to improve the administration of elections.” For fiscal year 2018-19, the Secretary of State's Office has released $1.5 million for county support for Polling Place Accessibility and Improving the Administration of Elections. This funding does not require a match by counties.
Aside from Los Angeles County, most counties received appropriations of $55,000 (eight), $25,000 (27), or $10,000 (22).
The top 10 counties based on Accessibility Funding and Eligible Voters, as of Sept. 30, can be found below with their current Voter Accessibility System:
|
County |
2018 Accessibility Funding |
Voter Accessibility System |
Eligible Voters for 2018 General Election |
|
1. Los Angeles |
$ 200,000 |
ES&S InkaVote Plus PBR v. 1.10 |
6,226,227 |
|
2. San Diego |
$ 55,000 |
Premier AccuVote-TSX v. 4.6.4 |
2,221,822 |
|
3. Orange |
$ 55,000 |
Hart eSlate v. 4.2.13 |
2,026,571 |
|
4. Riverside |
$ 55,000 |
Sequoia AVC Edge Model II v. 5.0.24 |
1,478,839 |
|
5. San Bernardino |
$ 55,000 |
Sequoia AVC Edge Model II v. 5.0.24 |
1,328,832 |
|
6. Santa Clara |
$ 55,000 |
Sequoia AVC Edge Model II v. 5.0.24 |
1,206,988 |
|
7. Alameda |
$ 55,000 |
Sequoia AVC Edge Model II v. 5.0.24 |
1,088,060 |
|
8. Sacramento |
$ 55,000 |
Dominion ImageCast X v. 5.2.6415.22930 |
1,012,179 |
|
9. Contra Costa |
$ 55,000 |
Dominion ImageCast X v. 5.2.6415.22930 |
758,853 |
|
10. San Francisco |
$ 25,000 |
Sequoia AVC Edge Model II v. 5.0.24 |
659,384 |
*The Center for Digital Government is a part of e.Republic, Techwire's parent company.
