Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />COUNTY OF ANOKA <br /> <br />Office of Elections & Voter Registration <br /> <br />325 East Main Street, Anoka MN 55303 <br />PHONE: (783) 323-5275 FAX: (763) 422-7526 TDD/TTY: (763) 323-5289 <br /> <br />ANOKA <br />COUNTY <br /> <br />DATE: <br /> <br />November 30, 2005 <br /> <br />FROM: <br /> <br />Anoka County Municipal Clerks, Township Clerks, and School District Clerks <br />Rachel Smith, Supervisor of Elections <br /> <br />TO: <br /> <br />SUBJECT: Status of HAVA voting Equipment for 2006 <br /> <br />I am writing to give you an update on the status of the HA V A voting equipment. On November 3, <br />2005, the Seaetary of State's office announced that they concluded the state contract negotiations <br />and awarded a state contract to ES&S. However, to date, no vendor has been certified in the <br />State. <br /> <br />At our last voting equipment workgroup, we discussed the option of using an upgrade to our <br />existing equipment, Diebold OSX. Diebold is in the process of developing the equipment and we <br />hoped it would be available for the 2006 elections. As a back-up, we discussed the option of using <br />Diebold TSX along with our current precinct counters. We now understand that our first choice, the <br />Diebold OSX will not be ready in time for the 2006 elections. <br /> <br />We now have two options, we purchase ES&S voting equipment or we work to get the Diebold <br />TSX option. If we purchase ES&S voting equipment, we would purchase new precinct counters <br />(M1oos) and a HAVA voting assistance terminal (the Automark). We may also want to examine <br />the purchase of just the Automark as a temporary solution for 2006. However, based upon our <br />analysis of any choices we may have, it is my recommendation that we stay with our current <br />vendor and use Diebold TSX through the 2006 elections. After 2006, we would then purchase the <br />Diebold OSX when it became available in 2007-2008. In arriving at this decision, I reviewed the <br />capital costs, programming, storage, maintenance, and training costs, and believe our option to <br />remain with Diebold is far more economical. We are in the process of working on the financial <br />impact for each city and hope to provide that information later today. <br /> <br />One of the challenges of pursuing this option is that Diebold's TSX must receive State certification <br />from the Minnesota Secretary of State's office. Throughout the past month, we have been working <br />very diligently to ensure that the option of using the Diebold TSX would be available. However, <br />yesterday, we received a letter stating that the Secretary of State's office denied certification. The <br />financial impact of both the short and long-term costs required under the new State contract are <br />