Weather | Sports | Forums | Comics | Classifieds | Calendar | Movies
The group must deal with unapproved machines, a slashed budget and a looming deadline.
By LISA GREENE
© St. Petersburg Times, published September 10, 2001
Ramona Updegraff knows what it's like to have her name listed on a ballot. After all, she's been mayor of Redington Beach and ran last year for County Commission.
But now Updegraff and six other Pinellas County residents must look at elections from a different angle: picking voting equipment that will process ballots in future elections.
The group's choice will influence how Pinellas residents vote for years, if not decades. The last machines lasted for 30 years.
But they must make a multimillion-dollar recommendation to commissioners in the space of a few weeks, after evaluating technology that is so new that many machines have yet to be approved by the state's elections office. To add to the pressure, Pinellas' decision already has been marked with controversies about costs and potential conflicts of interest.
A friend of Updegraff's put it to her this way:
"Ramona, you're going to buy a pig in a poke, and then it won't work after two years."
Updegraff said she thinks the group can do better. So does Deborah Clark, elections supervisor.
"They're very strong, independent-minded individuals," she said. "They care and they know how important this is."
Independence, said county Judge Patrick Caddell, will help.
"We're not directly connected to the County Commission, or to the elections office or to any of the vendors," the chairman of the group said. "We're free of all those concerns to do an honest and objective evaluation of the machines."
Commissioners picked the members to represent different community interests. They include Lois Crittenden, a Pinellas poll worker for at least 18 years; Jack Humburg, a consultant on providing access to the disabled; and Vyrle Davis, chairman of the African-American Voters Research and Education Committee. Caddell is the longtime chairman of the county Election Canvassing Board.
Companies wanting the county's business submit their proposals today. The group will review the bids, examine the machines for two or three days, discuss the pros and cons of each and then make their pick. The recommendation is due by Oct. 8. Commissioners, though, will make the final choice.
Group members must decide not only between vendors but also between two types of technology: optical scanners or touch-screen machines, a more expensive and newer technology. Optical scanners count paper ballots marked by voters, while voters touch computer screens to determine their choices with the touch-screen systems.
The county got early estimates of about $3.4-million for optical scanners and $14-million to $21-million for touch screens.
Purchasing the equipment has proved controversial. The county originally set aside $15-million to buy the machines. But the night commissioners passed the county's budget, they slashed the figure to $6.7-million to lower the county's impending property tax rate increase.
A few commissioners wondered whether the decision would force the county to buy less-expensive optical scan technology.
Commission Chairman Calvin Harris dropped by the committee's first meeting last week and told the group not to let the commissioners' funding decisions influence their work.
"I just wanted to reassure them that our commitment to buying the best equipment is a real commitment," Harris said. "Nothing has changed."
Harris and other commissioners say they're willing to borrow money, even if they have to pay more in interest charges, if that's what's needed.
That hasn't been the only point of controversy. Clark decided she would not sit on the committee after her husband's ties to a leading vendor, Election Systems & Software, became public. Clark will go to the group's meetings but said she's treading with caution.
"I'm not advising the committee; I'm just responding to questions they come up with," she said. "I'm going to be very careful to just answer the question, period."
Joan Brock, Clark's deputy supervisor, represents the office on the committee. Some elections staff members also will sit in to answer various technical questions, Clark said.
Committee members said they have specific concerns. Muslim Gadiwalla, chief information officer for the city of St. Petersburg, said he'll pay close attention to "the whole back end," the computer technology and how well it works. Can it fail? What safeguards make sure that votes can't get lost because of computer problems?
Updegraff has some of the same concerns. She also wants to be sure the machines are easy for voters to use.
Caddell wants to be able to assure the public that the system is secure and the votes can be trusted.
"Any time you're dealing with computer technology, you have people who tend to be distrustful," he said. "You hear the stories on the news of some 9-year-old kid hacking into NORAD or something."
Other factors that committee members will consider include whether the machines are easy for the poll workers to set up and use; whether the machines create a "paper trail" of ballots, in case recounts are needed; whether disabled people can use them; and what the company will do to provide training and technical help.