The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutBoard Meeting Agenda Packet 05-09-2023 MEETING AGENDA Date: May 9, 2023 Time: 5:15 PM Location: Bd of Elections Office, Long Leaf Room Type: Regular Scheduled Attendees: Oliver Carter III, Chair Rae Hunter-Havens, Elections Director Derrick R. Miller, Secretary Caroline Dawkins, Elections Deputy Director Lyana G. Hunter, Member Noelle Powers, Elections Systems Specialist Bruce Kemp, Member Joan Geiszler-Ludlum, Admin. Elections Technician Visitor(s): Tufanna Bradley, Assistant County Manager; Kemp Burpeau, Deputy County Attorney AGENDA ITEMS 1. Meeting Opening a. Call to Order b. Preliminary Announcement i. Silence Phones ii. Recording & Streaming iii. Other c. Pledge of Allegiance d. Approval of Agenda e. Approval of Minutes (11/1/22 and 4/11/23) 2. Public Comment and Question Period • 2-minute limit • 20-minute limit total 3. Director’s Report a. Financial Update b. List Maintenance c. Legal Updates 4. General Discussion 5. Adjournment *Agenda packets are sent via email in advance of meetings. Regular Meeting New Hanover County Board of Elections May 9, 2023 Subject: Approval of Agenda Summary: N/A Board Action Required: Staff recommends approval Item # 1d Regular Meeting New Hanover County Board of Elections May 9, 2023 Subject: Approval of Minutes Applicable Statutes and/or Rules N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 163-31(e) and 143-318.10(e) Summary: This includes minutes from the 11/1/22 and 4/11/23 meetings. Board Action Required: Staff recommends approval Item # 1d Item # 1e Board Minutes – 11/01/2022 Page | 1 SPECIAL ABSENTEE MEETING New Hanover County Board of Elections November 1, 2022 5:00 P.M. ATTENDANCE Members: Oliver Carter III, Chairman Derrick R. Miller, Secretary Russ C. Bryan, Member Lyana G. Hunter, Member [arrived 5:07 p.m.] Bruce Kemp, Member Staff: Rae Hunter-Havens, Executive Director Caroline Dawkins, Deputy Director Jenna Dahlgren, Elections Logistics Specialist Noelle Powers, Elections Systems Specialist Beth Pugh, Elections Specialist Joan Geiszler-Ludlum, Administrative Elections Technician Visitors: Lisa Wurtzbacher, Assistant County Manager; Kemp Burpeau, Deputy County Attorney Public Attendees: Lynn Dunn; Leslie Antos, Sheila Fellerath, League of Women Voters LCF; Julius Rothlein, Matthew Emborsky, NHC GOP; Chad Whitaker; A. Crouch; Susanne Werner, NHCDP Virtual Attendees: Loraine Buker; Thom Tracy; Sarah Vitt; Jessica O’Neill; Tyler Daye; Denise Brown; SS; Beth Pugh 1. MEETING OPENING a. Call to Order The New Hanover County Board of Elections meeting was held in the Board of Elections office, Long Leaf Room, 1241A Military Cutoff Road, Wilmington, NC. All members were present. Chair Carter called the meeting to order at 5:01 p.m. Chair Carter, Secretary Miller, and Members Bryan and Kemp were present. b. Preliminary Announcements Chair Carter reminded the audience to silence their cell phones and that the meeting is Board Minutes – 11/01/2022 Page | 2 being recorded and live streamed over the internet. Chair Carter reported on two tropical storms, neither of which pose any threat to New Hanover County. Chair Carter reviewed the schedule of upcoming Board meetings: • Monday, November 7 at 5:00 p.m., a special meeting for review of absentee ballot applications; • Tuesday, November 8 at 2:00 p.m., a special meeting to count the ballots cast at the One Stop Early Voting sites and tabulating the absentee-by-mail ballots that have been previously scanned but not counted; • Tuesday, November 15 at 5:15 p.m., a regular meeting to conduct Board business; • Thursday, November 17 at 2:00 p.m., the pre-canvass meeting; and • Friday, November 18 at 11:00 a.m. to conduct the final canvass. c. Pledge of Allegiance Chair Carter called on the audience to rise and recite the Pledge of Allegiance. d. Approval of Agenda Member Kemp moved that the agenda be approved as submitted, second by Secretary Miller. Motion carried unanimously. 2. PUBLIC COMMENT AND QUESTION PERIOD Chair Carter called upon the public in-person attendees for their comments or questions, limited to two minutes each with a total maximum time of twenty minutes, extended because this is the last meeting before Election Day. He reminded anyone making a public comment to yield the floor to the Board members and Director. He acknowledged receiving emailed comments or questions from Matt Emborsky on behalf of the New Hanover County Republican Party. In response to a question from Mr. Emborsky, Director Hunter-Havens said that 7,053 absentee by mail ballots have been sent out with 2,839 ballots returned to date. She noted that these numbers exceed the number of absentee ballots in the 2016 General (Presidential) Election. In response to a question from Mr. Rothlein, Director Hunter-Havens said she is evaluating staff capacity to schedule an additional time for public review of the approved absentee ballot applications, noting that the current schedule of Board meetings may impede staff availability. Seeing and hearing no other public attendees wishing to comment, Chair Carter closed the Public Comment period. 4. STATUTORILY-REQUIRED BUSINESS Board Minutes – 11/01/2022 Page | 3 a. Chair Carter’s Review of the Public Viewing of Opening and Closing Procedures Chair Carter said he added this item due to the volume of emails over the previous week, asking questions about what is permitted and prohibited regarding public observation of the polling place opening and closing procedures before the polls open and after the polls close. The statute appears to allow public observation before the polls are open on Election Day. Past practice of this Board, including the current election, is to treat the first day of early voting as the opening of the OSEV sites and the last day of early voting as the closing of the sites, and the Board has allowed public observation of the procedures only on those days. Observation includes viewing the zero tapes which are printed at the opening of the polls. Public observation before the sites are opened and after the sites are closed to the public is not permitted on each and every day of early voting, only on the first and last days. However, there is difference of opinion as to what the statute requires. Chair Carter called for discussion by the Board. Member Kemp said that State Board Numbered Memo 2022-14 narrowly defines “opening of the polls” as the time when the zero tape is printed. He contends that opening procedures are much broader than that task alone. He said, in his opinion, the Numbered Memo is flawed and in conflict with the regulation spelled out in the NC Administrative Code. Public observation of opening procedures improves transparency, boosts public confidence in elections security, and should be allowed every day of early voting. Not doing so implies there is something to hide. Chair Carter said, in his reading, the Numbered Memo appears to allow more public access than what the statutes and regulations allow, because they use terms that limit application to Election Day only, such as “polling place” or “polling site.” Member Bryan said the statutes and regulations may have been codified before early voting was authorized, which may explain the more limited language. He asked whether access to see the opening procedures has been allowed before this year. Director Hunter- Havens said such access has only been requested in the past two or three years. Chair Carter said, “opening of the polls” is subject to various interpretations, from when the polling place door is first unlocked to the required announcement that “the polls are now open.” Numbered Memo 2022-14, which was issued on the eve of the start of early voting, points to public access to three specific procedures: opening the voting system(s); examining the ballot for accuracy; and examining the counter to verify a zero balance of ballots cast. The Numbered Memo recognized that these three procedures do not need to be performed every day during early voting. In that context the staff have taken the correct steps. Similar access will be allowed to observe the one-stop closing procedures. Director Hunter-Havens said that the DS200s will only be powered down, not closed, at the end of one-stop. The results of one-stop voting will not be tabulated until Election Day, as the statute requires. She added that the public is permitted to check the daily Board Minutes – 11/01/2022 Page | 4 count when the DS200s are powered on each day during one-stop, for comparison with the daily count from the previous day. She said she is trying to find the right balance between transparency and security. Some Board members said they were comfortable with the current process, given these explanations of the implementation of Numbered Memo 2022-14. Chair Carter noted that the paper records showing the machine counts each day will be available for review after Election Day. b. Chief Judge and Judge Appointments Director Hunter-Havens reported that three judges have given notice that they are not available to serve in this election. Their respective parties were notified with no response from one party as of today. Chair Carter asked if the replacements are being appointed or administratively assigned under authority delegated to the Director by Resolution adopted on September 13, 2022. Director Hunter-Havens said she is administratively assigning these officials. Chair Carter said he wanted clarity around whether an official is appointed or administratively assigned for consideration when terms end next summer. Chair Carter moved to remove Dorothy Hodder as a precinct official due to failure to complete the required training, second by Secretary Miller. Member Kemp brought to the Board’s attention that NC Gen. Stat. 163-41(a) says the official must be appointed and qualified. He said that an appointee who did not complete the steps to qualify for the position was not successfully appointed and the position reverts to the previous appointee. Deputy Director Dawkins said that the previous appointee was removed and was replaced by a transfer who is not available to work. Member Hunter said it may be clearer to remove the appointee. In response, Chair Carter withdrew the previous motion and made a new motion either to deem the position to which Dorothy Hodder was appointed is open because she failed to qualify to serve, or, in the alternative, deem her removed for the same reason, second by Member Kemp. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Carter called the vote. Motion carried unanimously. Chair Carter moved to remove Ed Jolly as judge, explaining that while Mr. Jolly qualified to serve as a precinct official, he has been unable to serve, second by Secretary Miller. Hearing no discussion, Chair Carter called the vote. Motion carried unanimously. Member Kemp inquired about the lack of a Republican precinct official in W26. Deputy Director Dawkins said the appointed Republican judge did not respond. There were no other resident Republican officials available and no remaining Republicans on the back- up list. The current party affiliations are four Democrats and four unaffiliated officials. c. Review of Absentee Ballot Applications Chair Carter called on Director Hunter-Havens for her report. The Director said there are Board Minutes – 11/01/2022 Page | 5 779 Absentee Ballot Applications1 which meet all requirements, including civilian, military, and overseas absentee-by-mail ballots, and she recommends their approval. Carter asked for a report on the two UOCAVA Applications with a Washington, DC postmark, that the Board reviewed and deferred from the previous meeting for additional investigation. The Director said that investigation shows that the two voters live in Mexico and use a domestic mail service to assure mail security. She recommends their approval as well. Secretary Miller moved approval of these 2 UOCAVA Applications, second by Member Kemp. Chair Carter asked to defer action on the motion while he checks information in the federal statute regarding the requirements for UOCAVA absentee voting. Action deferred by consent of the Board. Director Hunter-Havens presented 1 UOCAVA Application. The voter lives overseas but happened to be in the county when the voter completed the ballot, which was printed while out of the country, and mailed it locally to reduce the cost of postage. The voter has subsequently returned to their home overseas. On receiving the ballot, staff placed it in a UOCAVA in-take envelope and attached the Application. The ballot can be duplicated if the Board approves it. Chair Carter moved the approval of this UOCAVA ballot, second by Member Hunter. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Carter called the vote. Chair Carter, Secretary Miller, and Members Hunter and Bryan voted aye. Member Kemp abstained. Motion carried by majority vote. Director Hunter-Havens said that concludes consideration of the Envelopes that were pending Board approval. She next presented 19 that were slightly damaged when received, including 2 with date-stamp issues, meaning that the ballot was received by mail but was date-stamped accidentally to indicate receipt by in-person delivery. The question is whether, in the judgment of the Board, the envelope damage is sufficient to have allowed tampering with the ballot. After review, and hearing no discussion, Chair Carter moved the acceptance of the 19 Applications reviewed by the Board, second by Member Bryan. Motion carried unanimously. Director Hunter-Havens presented 8 Envelopes which the US Postal Service processed and delivered without the sender having applied postage. The Board proceeded to review the Envelopes. Member Bryan noted one Envelope that appeared to have been sealed, 1 When a voter chooses to submit an absentee ballot by mail or personal delivery, the voter places the completed ballot into a special envelope called a “Container Return Envelope”. On the outside of the Envelope is a pre-printed form called an “Absentee Ballot Application”. The voter is required to complete this Application and have it signed by two witnesses or have it notarized. In almost all cases, the Board must approve the Application before the Envelope is opened and the ballot remove. The terms “Absentee Ballot Application” and “Container-Return Envelope are often used interchangeably in casual conversation. In these minutes, “Envelope” will generally refer to the physical envelope, while “Application” will generally refer to the form printed on the outside of the Envelope. Board Minutes – 11/01/2022 Page | 6 reopened, and resealed, and asked that it be held pending contact with the voter for clarification. Chair Carter moved the acceptance of 7 Applications reviewed by the Board, second by Secretary Miller. Motion carried unanimously. Director Hunter-Havens presented 3 Envelopes that were dropped off at a One Stop location. In two instances, due to error, the precinct official did not have the returner complete the required log sheet; in the third instance, the returner did not sign the log sheet, but it was verified by a precinct official. Guidance from the North Carolina State Board of Elections (NCSBE) is that failure to comply with the logging requirement is not a sufficient basis alone to invalidate an absentee ballot. (NCSBE Numbered Memo 2020- 23) After review by the Board, Chair Carter moved the acceptance of 1 Application with an unsigned log sheet because it appears that the voter returned their own ballot and just overlooked signing the log sheet, second by Member Kemp. Motion carried unanimously. Chair Carter said the next Application has an incomplete log sheet, showing only the date, time and name of the voter. He called for a motion. Secretary Miller moved the acceptance of the ballot, second by Members Hunter and Bryan. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Carter called the vote. Secretary Miller, Members Bryan and Hunter voted aye; Chair Carter and Member Kemp voted no. Motion carried by majority vote. Chair Carter moved to hold acceptance of 1 Application until staff has verified with the voter who had returned their absentee ballot. In response to a question, he said he is willing to accept the voter’s reply by phone or email. Director Hunter-Havens presented 2 Applications that were returned by a person who listed their relationship to the voter as “partner” or “life partner” of the voter, as indicated on the return log. Guidance from the State Board is that the county Board shall not disapprove an absentee ballot solely because it was delivered by someone who is not an authorized returner, but may consider the delivery of the ballot in conjunction with other evidence in determining the ballot as valid. During review, Secretary Miller pointed out that the returner signed the section indicating the voter had requested the life partner return the ballot due to the voter’s disability. This option has been added since the 2020 election. Responding to Chair Carter’s question, the Director said Numbered Memo 2020-23 contains this guidance. Member Hunter said that requiring assistance in returning the ballot is a separate consideration from needing assistance in completing the ballot. Chair Carter read from 08 NCAC 18.0102: At the absentee meeting …, the county board of elections may consider the delivery of a ballot in accordance with this Rule in conjunction with other Board Minutes – 11/01/2022 Page | 7 evidence in determining whether the container-return envelope has been properly executed according to the requirements in G. S. 163-231. Failure to comply with this Rule shall not constitute evidence sufficient in and of itself to establish that the voter did not lawfully vote his or her ballot. Chair Carter said he understood it to mean that, without other evidence, separate and apart from a defect on the brown slip, we cannot conclude that the voter did not lawfully vote the ballot. Member Bryan said he heard two things: all the required information must appear on the brown form, and if it is not on the brown form, that does not necessarily mean that the ballot is invalid. Who returned the ballot is a separate issue. He said he is not hearing any mention of the disability issue. Secretary Miller said that the penalty for improperly returning the absentee ballot adheres to the returner, not the voter. If the ballot is disqualified, the voter is penalized. He said further that it is possible to refer to a spouse as a life partner. Secretary Miller moved acceptance of both ballots, second by Member Hunter. Chair Carter said he understands 08 NCAC 18.0102 to address the circumstance where the returner does not complete all the required information, but makes no reference to assisting with delivery in the a disability situation. Member Kemp said that SBE Numbered Memo 2022-11 implements the Court Order Regarding Assistance for Absentee Voters with Disabilities. Member Kemp said there is a place on the Container- Return Envelope for the voter to indicate a request for assistance in completing the ballot or in returning the ballot. Chair Carter moved to table Secretary Miller’s previous motion to approve the ballots, and requested the staff to reach out to the two voter for any additional information that may be helpful to the Board’s decision, second by Member Bryan. Chair Carter called for any discussion of the motion to table. Member Kemp said he is concerned with when the Board might have the information to be able to vote if it is not available before the Board adjourns, and whether there will be time to notify the voters. Chair Carter asked the staff to attempt to contact the voters while the meeting continues. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Carter called the vote. Chair Carter, Secretary Miller, Members Bryan and Kemp voted aye; Member Hunter voted no. Motion to table carried by majority vote. Director Hunter-Havens presented 2 Applications that have discrepancies in the name of the voter. In one instance, there is a variation in the name of the voter; in the other instance, the witness started to write their name on the voter line, then wrote the voter’s name above it. After review, Chair Carter moved acceptance of both Applications, second by Member Kemp. Hearing no discussion, Chair Carter called the vote. Motion carried unanimously. Board Minutes – 11/01/2022 Page | 8 Director Hunter-Havens presented 3 Container-Return Envelopes completed by members of the same family with stray marks or doodles on the envelopes. After review, Chair Carter moved acceptance of 3 Applications, second by Member Hunter. Hearing no discussion, Chair Carter called the vote. Chair Carter, Secretary Miller, Members Bryan and Hunter voted aye; Member Kemp did not vote, having been out of the room during the review of this Application. The Board reviewed the Container-Return Envelopes not yet acted on: 2 UOCAVA from the previous meeting to allow Chair Carter to review applicable federal regulations; 1 Container-Return Envelope reviewed during this meeting where the envelope was taped, to allow staff to check with the voter; and 2 Applications where the returners listed themselves as life partner or partner on the log sheet. Director Hunter-Havens presented 1 Container-Return Envelope where the disabled voter was unable to sign the Application. The voter received assistance pursuant to Numbered Memo 2022-11 which was issued pursuant to court order. The assistant properly completed their section of the Container-Return Envelope. The Director said she is presenting this Application to the Board because the voter did not sign it. After review, Member Kemp moved approval of the Application, second by Chair Carter. Hearing no discussion, Chair Carter called the vote. Motion carried unanimously. Director Hunter-Havens presented 22 UOCAVA ballots which were received and duplicated following Board policy. The Board agreed to review the ballots in two teams, each team to review half. After review, Chair Carter moved approval of the 22 UOCAVA ballots, second by Secretary Miller. Hearing no discussion, Chair Carter called the vote. Motion carried unanimously. Chair Carter turned the Board’s attention to the 2 UOCAVA ballots that were tabled from the previous meeting. He has reviewed the federal regulation on UOCAVA voting which provides that a voter who resides outside the United States may vote a UOCAVA ballot, without regard to whether the voter might be in the United States on Election Day. Chair Carter moved approval of the two UOCAVA ballots, second by Member Hunter. Hearing no discussion, Chair Carter called the vote. Motion carried unanimously. Chair Carter moved that the Board review 20 percent of the 757 Applications, (which is 152) in two teams, with each team reviewing half or 76, second by Secretary Miller. In response to a question from Member Hunter, Chair Carter said the sample may include some already reviewed with special circumstances and approved by the Board. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Carter called the vote. Chair Carter, Secretary Miller, Members Bryan and Hunter voted aye; Member Kemp voted no. Motion carried by majority vote. The Board selected precincts W33 (28), W29 (20), W15 (11), H11 (33), H06 (26), W03 (3), W17 (11), M04 (25), and H04 (20) for review. Review began at 7:24 p.m. and concluded at 7:51 p.m. Member Hunter left the meeting upon conclusion of the review. Director Hunter-Havens reported that the water is turned off in the building to repair a Board Minutes – 11/01/2022 Page | 9 leak, leaving the building without access to rest rooms or running water, with completion of repairs expected by 8:00 a.m. the following morning. The Board decided to continue working. Director Hunter-Havens reported that Elections Specialist Beth Pugh spoke with the two people who returned absentee ballots and completed the log sheet as partner of the voters. The individuals said they were helping the voters, were not legally married, and the voters did not have a disability that prevented them from returning their ballots. Director Hunter-Havens reported that Elections Specialist Pugh also spoke with the voter whose Container-Return Envelope was returned sealed with tape. The voter reported receiving the ballot packet with the return envelope sealed. The voter opened the envelope, preventing the envelope from being resealed, and then taped the envelope closure after inserting the voted ballot. Chair Carter moved acceptance of the Application, second by Member Kemp. Motion carried unanimously. Chair Carter returned to the 2 Container-Return Envelopes returned by “partners” of the voters. Member Kemp moved disapproval of the 2 ballots as not curable defects, second by Member Bryan. Following discussion, Member Kemp suggested tabling his motion to allow him time to review the relevant statutes. Chair Carter said he would treat that suggestion as a motion to table, second by Secretary Miller. Motion carried unanimously. Member Kemp cited NC Gen. Stat. §163-231(b)(2) for the requirement of return of the ballot in person by the voter, the voter’s near relative, or verifiable legal guardian. He said Numbered Memo 2022-11 does not cite the correct statute. Chair Carter moved to take the item off the table, second by Member Kemp. Chair Carter, Members Bryan and Kemp voted aye; Secretary Miller voted no. Motion to remove from the table carried by majority vote. The Board discussed various views of the meaning and application of the statute and Numbered Memo. In reply to a question, Director Hunter-Havens said the Board has the option to spoil and reissue the absentee ballot. Member Kemp moved disapproval of the 2 Applications, second by Member Bryan. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Carter called the vote. Members Bryan and Kemp voted aye; Chair Carter and Secretary Miller voted no. Motion failed for lack of a majority. Chair Carter moved approval of the 2 Applications, second by Secretary Miller. Chair Carter and Secretary Miller voted aye; Members Bryan and Kemp voted no. Motion failed for lack of a majority. Chair Carter said he would reconsider his vote and invited Member Kemp to make his motion again. Member Kemp moved disapproval of the 2 Applications, second by Chair Carter. Hearing no discussion, Chair Carter called the vote. Chair Carter, Members Bryan and Board Minutes – 11/01/2022 Page | 10 Kemp voted aye; Secretary Miller voted no. Motion carried by majority vote. Director Hunter-Havens presented 21,515 valid Applications submitted at the five One Stop sites from October 25 through October 31. Chair Carter moved approval of 21,515 One Stop Applications, second by Secretary Miller. Hearing no discussion, Chair Carter called the vote. Motion carried unanimously. Chair Carter moved to authorize the staff to take the preparatory steps to open the approved Container-Return Envelopes, remove the ballots, and scan the ballots, second by Secretary Miller. Motion carried unanimously. Scanning began at 8:19 p.m. and concluded at 9:31 p.m. Chair Carter announced that scanning of the absentee-by-mail ballots was completed and returned to the agenda. 7. GENERAL DISCUSSION Chair Carter called for any items for general discussion among the Board members. Chair Carter proposed to add a meeting in lieu of the Board’s regular meeting for November. He noted that Director Hunter-Havens expressed reservations about an additional Board meeting during the canvass period, given the tasks necessary to complete the canvass by November 18. He suggested that the Board discuss now, but wait until the November 7 meeting to make any motions about adding a meeting. After discussion, the Board deferred further consideration until the next meeting on November 7. ADJOURNMENT Chair Carter moved that the meeting be adjourned at 9:59 p.m., second by Member Kemp. Motion carried unanimously. The next Board meeting is scheduled to be held on Monday, November 7, 2023, at 5:00 p.m., at the Board of Elections office, Long Leaf Room, 1241A Military Cutoff Road, Wilmington, NC APPROVED BY: RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: _______________________________ ______________________________ DERRICK R. MILLER RAE HUNTER-HAVENS SECRETARY ELECTIONS DIRECTOR Board Minutes – 04/11/2023 Page | 1 REGULAR MEETING New Hanover County Board of Elections April 11, 2023 5:15 P.M. ATTENDANCE Members: Oliver Carter III, Chairman Derrick R. Miller, Secretary Lyana G. Hunter, Member [attending virtually] Bruce Kemp, Member Staff: Rae Hunter-Havens, Executive Director Noelle Powers, Elections Systems Administrator Joan Geiszler-Ludlum, Administrative Elections Technician Visitors: Tufanna Bradley, Assistant County Manager; Kemp Burpeau, Deputy County Attorney Public Attendees: Jana Albritton, Ava Bevins, League of Women Voters LCF; Matthew Emborsky, Ellen Jo Kraemer, Julius Rothlein, Lisa Lavoie, Chris Canney, NHC GOP; Susanne Werner, NHCDP Virtual Attendees: Ruth Odom, Haven, Lyana Hunter (Board Member), Denise Brown 1. MEETING OPENING a. Call to Order The New Hanover County Board of Elections meeting was held in the Board of Elections office, Long Leaf Room, 1241A Military Cutoff Road, Wilmington, NC. All members were present. Chair Carter called the meeting to order at 5:15 p.m. b. Preliminary Announcements Chair Carter announced that Member Hunter has joined the meeting virtually and that Member Bryan has recently resigned from the Board. Chair Carter reminded the audience to silence their cell phones; the meeting is being recorded and live streamed on the internet. Board Minutes – 04/11/2023 Page | 2 c. Pledge of Allegiance Chair Carter invited all in attendance to rise and recite the Pledge of Allegiance. d. Approval of Agenda Member Kemp moved that the agenda be approved as submitted, second by Secretary Miller. Hearing no discussion, Chair Carter called the vote. Motion carried unanimously. e. Approval of Minutes Member Kemp moved that the minutes of the 11/1/22, 2/14/23, and 3/13/23 Board meetings be approved as submitted, second by Chair Carter. Following discussion, Chair Carter moved to table the 11/1/2022 minutes until the next regular meeting; to amend the minutes of the 2/14/23 and 3/13/23 meetings according to his proposed revisions that he distributed ahead of this meeting; and to amend further the 2/14/23 minutes to add a footnote clarifying the meaning of the voter registration status of “Removed”1 in the section on List Maintenance on page four, second by Member Kemp. Chair Carter called for any discussion. Member Hunter pointed out two typographical errors in the 2/14/2023 minutes. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Carter called for the vote on the amendment, to approve the minutes of 2/14/2023 and 3/13/23 with the revisions as discussed, second by Secretary Miller. Motion to amend carried unanimously. Chair Carter then called the vote on the motion to approve as amended. Motion carried unanimously. Chair Carter moved to table the minutes of 11/1/2022 until the next meeting, second by Secretary Miller. Hearing no discussion, Chair Carter called the vote. Motion carried unanimously. 2. PUBLIC COMMENT AND QUESTION PERIOD Chair Carter called upon the public in-person attendees for their comments or questions, limited to two minutes each. Chair Carter acknowledged the email comments from Mr. Rothlein received in advance of this meeting, and summarized the subjects of those comments: 1. Confidentiality of both ballots and electronic images of cast vote records. The Director’s response has been sent by email, advising those records are confidential and legally exempt from production in response to a public records request. 2. Review of voting equipment specifications. 1 In the context of List Maintenance, “Removed” does not mean that the voter’s registration is entirely deleted from the voter rolls. Board Minutes – 04/11/2023 Page | 3 Response is pending review with the State Board of Elections (SBE). 3. An email list submitted by Sylvia Brock, challenging fourteen absentee-by-mail voters because they appear to have moved out of the county. The Director said the submitted list is based on a Google search, which is not a permissible basis for initiating a voter inquiry, and may only be addressed through the List Maintenance procedures. 4. Response to New Hanover County Republican Party After-Action Report. Chair Carter said a comprehensive response to the After-Action Report.is not planned, but may be incorporated into other procedural reviews and updates. 5. Request to review all 2020 General and 2021 Municipal elections absentee-by-mail Applications/Container-Return Envelopes.2 The Director sent an email to Mr. Rothlein today, advising that, in order to move forward with this records request, the requester will be required to pay the cost of staffing and related expenses for such a review, as confirmed by SBE General Counsel. In response to a question from Chair Carter, the Director said the 2020 General Election Absentee Ballot Applications would have been scheduled for destruction according to the standard record retention policy, but she was able to put their destruction on hold, pending completion of the requested review. Matthew Emborsky commented, regarding the public records review of the 2020 and 2021 absentee-by-mail Applications, that when public records contain both confidential and non-confidential information, the Board has a statutory duty to separate the confidential information from public information (i.e., to redact the confidential information). He also shared his observations that, from his cost-analysis of the proposed precinct consolidation, the cost driver of polling places is better addressed by reducing the number of One-Stop Early Voting or by reducing the number of sites. Chair Carter said that cost is not the sole driving factor in precinct consolidation, rather key factors are precinct official availability, access, and service to voters. Mr. Emborsky suggested better marketing to communicate the need for precinct officials. Chair Carter said that some precincts have more available workers than others. Chair Carter introduced and welcomed Assistant County Manager Tufanna Bradley, who is the new liaison from the County Manager’s staff to the Board of Elections. She has served as liaison previously and is returning due to changes in staff assignments. Seeing and hearing no other public attendees wishing to comment, Chair Carter closed the Public Comment period. 2 When a voter chooses to submit an absentee ballot by mail or personal delivery, the voter places the completed ballot into a special envelope called a “Container Return Envelope.” On the outside of the Envelope is a pre-printed form called an “Absentee Ballot Application.” The voter is required to complete this Application and have it signed by two witnesses or have it notarized. In almost all cases, the Board must approve the Application before the Envelope is opened and the ballot remove. The terms “Absentee Ballot Application” and “Container-Return Envelope are often used interchangeably in casual conversation. In these minutes, “Envelope” will generally refer to the physical envelope, while “Application” will generally refer to the form printed on the outside of the Envelope. Board Minutes – 04/11/2023 Page | 4 3. DIRECTOR’S REPORT Chair Carter called on Director Hunter-Havens for her report. a. Financial Update The Director reported that the operating expenses are 96 percent expended through March 31. She noted that funding for the new warehouse space was not included in the continuation and adopted budget, which might cause a deficit, but currently she expects to end the fiscal year within the currently budgeted allotment due to other savings. The only large expenditure remaining is mailing of more than 2,000 confirmation cards to voters reflecting the NCOA updates. Chair Carter asked about the monthly cell phone expense which seems high. Director Hunter-Havens said some of the expense is the chief judge cell phones. She has questioned the cost and learned that the initial quote she was given is not the actual charge. She is investigating to get further clarification. b. List Maintenance Director Hunter-Havens reported that, per data provided from the Statewide Elections Information Management System (SEIMS), the New Hanover County Board of Elections completed the following: • Redesignated status as Removed3 for 1,846 voters on the voter registration rolls from February 1 through March 31, 2023, consistent with N.C. Gen. Stat. §163-82.14. • Processed 1,776 new registration forms, 996 registration forms without changes, and 1,538 registration updates from February 1 through March 31, 2023. 4. NEW BUSINESS a. Resolutions to Adopt Precinct Consolidations Chair Carter called on Director Hunter-Havens for her report regarding Precinct Consolidation. She said the proposal is (i) to consolidate precincts W13 and W24 to form a new precinct W34, with 5,363 registered voters, and (ii) to consolidate precincts W28 and W32 to form a new precinct W35 with 5,144 registered voters. Each of these current precincts have a small voter registration pool and consistently low Election Day turnout. The proposed consolidations will reduce operational costs without diminishing the capacity to conduct safe and secure elections while providing a high level of customer 3 In the context of List Maintenance, the term “Removed” means that the voter’s registration status is changed because the voter is no longer eligible to vote in this County. By law, “Removed” voters are not deleted from the voter registration rolls. A voter may be removed when the voter moves out of the county or state, has died, is convicted of a felony and is serving an active sentence, or due to a long period of inactivity and the routine procedures of List Maintenance. Board Minutes – 04/11/2023 Page | 5 service to these voters. These consolidations have the added benefit of a positive impact on election official staffing and appointments by providing a larger pool of potential resident officials who are qualified and willing to serve. In addition, consolidation will reduce the drain on the back-up pool of qualified and trained “transfer” officials who can be called upon to fill last minute vacancies, meeting the larger goal of providing all precincts with the same positive voting experience in fully-staffed precincts. Director Hunter-Haven reviewed the next steps after adoption of these resolutions. The new precinct boundaries comply with all SBE requirements, including that boundaries coincide with census block boundaries based on the most recent federal decennial census. She will submit the adopted resolutions with the required documentation to the Executive Director of the State Board, which includes: 1. Cover letter by email outlining what the county board is proposing and why, including the election date on which the consolidation becomes effective. 2. Electronic maps of the proposed consolidated precincts, showing the current and proposed boundaries and the location of the assigned polling place. 3. Electronic map as shape file of the proposed precincts within the countywide precinct map. 4. The Polling Place Accessibility Survey for each assigned polling site. Chair Carter asked about the plan to notify voters of the changes following the statutory requirements of N.C. Gen. Stat. 163-128 (a). The Director said notification will include a targeted mailing in August-September ahead of the municipal election, using a contracted vendor, in addition to the other requirements. Secretary Miller said he sees this as a positive move to address a number of identified issues, and moved the adoption of both resolutions, second by Member Kemp. Chair Carter offered two editorial changes to the resolutions. Hearing no other discussion, Chair Carter called the vote. Motion carried unanimously. b. Chair Carter’s request for review and discussion of draft written lease agreement with NHC Chair Carter gave some background for this item. County Boards of Election are local governmental units, similar to but separate from county governments. County Boards are also akin to local divisions of a state agency, the State Board of Elections. However, County Boards of Election are entirely dependent on their respective county governments for funding. The county government is required by law to provide adequate funding for the County Board. Some of that funding is provided in-kind, such as office space in county-owned property. The redevelopment plan for the Government Center includes a separate building planned and designed for the board of elections. An issue has arisen recently with some county staff wanting unfettered access to the Elections space without regard to the necessary security requirements to secure confidential information, data, documents, and equipment. Board Minutes – 04/11/2023 Page | 6 Discussions to formalize a lease spelling out how the space is managed have begun. Chair Carter has drafted a proposed lease for the new building, spelling out what have previously been informal arrangements, which he sent to county staff. He said he received notice shortly before this meeting that the county no longer wishes to discuss a lease of county-owned space, that the proposed new building not be built, and instead the County leasing commercial space in the community. He said he now sees no point in discussing his draft lease in light of that information. He offered Deputy County Attorney Burpeau and Assistant County Manager Bradley the opportunity to respond to his description from his point of view. Deputy County Attorney Burpeau said that he represents the County, not the Board of Elections. Given that each may now have a different interest in the matter, he suggested that the Board might consider retaining separate counsel. He said that the County provides space for a number of State agencies, such as the Administrative Office of the Courts, Probation and Parole, Public Defenders, and Juvenile Justice, with security and maintenance procedures in place to secure information, but not to the degree that Elections requires. This realization led to the suggestion that a more responsive way to meet Elections needs might be to lease privately-owned space with the County’s assistance in locating suitable space and funding, with the County Board of Elections having more control over the leased space. Assistant County Manager Bradley said, while she is new today as the liaison to the Board of Elections, she feels there is some room for negotiations and no need to close the door yet. Chair Carter said he found it more difficult than expected to modify a standard commercial lease for this situation. He said he distributed the draft earlier today and not everyone has had a chance to review it thoroughly. He said it appears that the draft terms regarding how, when and with what amount of notice county employees could access the offices are a sticking point, and he confirmed that with Ms. Bradley. Member Kemp said that he thought the draft covered the concerns well. Secretary Miller said he understood the issue was not access for maintenance or routine access. He asked whether the County initiated the conversation regarding the option of leasing non-County space, or whether Chair Carter initially suggested it. Mr. Burpeau said he understood the County had suggested the possibility of leased space to better meet the security needs of Elections. Member Hunter said she has concerns that the County has provided space for Elections in the old Government Center and now at the Northeast Library without incident for some time, and now, because of one incident, the County is considering scrapping a new building that has been approved and funded. This seems to be an extreme reaction to one situation. She said she hoped that scrapping the entire, approved project would not be the solution. Board Minutes – 04/11/2023 Page | 7 Member Hunter said the amount of time required to give notice of a need for county staff access seemed like a lot. If the county’s concern is the notice requirement, then that is negotiable. Given the current times, with so much public scrutiny of election security and confidentiality of records, who has access cannot be adequately addressed by separate storage or locking information in file cabinets. She noted there are similar restrictions in the Probation and Parole offices on county employee access under some circumstances, such as during a parole officer conference with a parolee. She would like to come back to the table to arrive at a better balance between elections security and county staff access. Chair Carter said his concern is not only that a county employee might see confidential information but also the doubts, questions, and suspicions it may raise among some members of the public, even if the county employee did not see any confidential information or did not touch any sensitive equipment. He said that in legal ethics there are rules on how attorneys can interact with judges, regarding not only avoiding a conflict of interest but also avoiding even the appearance of a conflict of interest. He is sensitive to the concerns that feed conspiracy theories, where even appropriate access to address a broken water pipe may raise questions. Member Hunter said she wanted to be clear that she believes totally that any county employee entering the elections office is not there with any ill will or any negative intention. She said she agreed with Chair Carter’s concerns with the appearance of impropriety and the conclusions that some will draw from that. Assistant County Manager Bradley encouraged continuing the conversation. 5. OLD BUSINESS Chair Carter said there is one item of Old Business, his request to review Final Canvass Procedures in the 2022 General Election, in particular Member Kemp’s vote not to approve the final canvass and his motivation for that vote. He said Member Kemp has been very generous in answering his questions. Addressing Member Kemp, Chair Carter said he understood that Member Kemp’s concern is the lack of weekly results reports for the absentee-by-mail ballots approved by the Board at its Special Absentee Meetings in the weeks leading up to an election. Member Kemp believes that, as a party to the Final Canvass, the Board should be shown the tabulation of votes by the DS850. These reports would show the breakdown of votes by contest and by candidate. Member Kemp said he is concerned with the absence of those reports since he believes that the statutes require them, citing N.C. Gen. Stat. §163-182.5 (b): “The county board shall examine the returns [i] from precincts, [ii] from absentee official ballots, [iii] from the sample hand-to-eye paper ballot counts, and [iv] from provisional official ballots and shall conduct the canvass.” (N.C. Gen. Stat. §163-182.5 (b), internal numbering added) Chair Carter read the statutory definition of the election “abstract.” Board Minutes – 04/11/2023 Page | 8 "Abstract" means a document signed by the members of the board of elections showing the votes for each candidate and ballot proposal on the official ballot in the election. The abstract shall show [i] a total number of votes for each candidate in each precinct and [ii] a total for each candidate in the county. It shall also show [iii] the number of votes for each candidate [(a)] among the absentee official ballots, [(b)] among the provisional official ballots, and [(c)] in any other category of official ballots that is not otherwise reported. (N.C. Gen. Stat. §163-182 (1), internal numbering added) Chair Carter asked Director Hunter-Havens whether this Board’s abstract complied with those requirements. The Director said the final abstract gives a break-down of results by voting method, showing results by absentee-by-mail, One Stop, and Election Day. However, results reports from the weekly absentee-by-mail scan on the DS850 are not available for each week because county boards of elections are prohibited by law from reporting results until Election Day. Preparing results reports for the absentee-by-mail ballots scanned each week leading up to the election would violate the law. Member Kemp proposed that all absentee-by-mail ballots could be rescanned on Election Day. He shared a copy of N.C. Gen. Stat. §163-234 (3) in support of his proposal. Chair Carter read §163-234 (3) aloud: Notwithstanding subdivision (2) of this section, a county board of elections may, at each meeting at which it approves absentee ballot applications pursuant to G. S. 163-230.1(e) and (f), remove those ballots from their envelopes and have them read by an optical scanning machine, without printing the totals on the scanner. Member Kemp said he agreed and understood why a results report cannot be run at each weekly meeting. But he proposes that the scanning be delayed until Election Day. Under this approach, once the Envelopes are opened at the Board’s weekly meeting, the approved ballots would be sorted by precinct for scanning but not scanned. Instead, the Board would hold all the approved absentee-by-mail ballots, sorted by precinct for scanning and counting on Election Day. The Board could then generate the results report that the statute requires. In support of this proposal, Member Kemp noted that the school board primary recount demonstrated that it is possible to re-scan the ballots in a relatively short period of time. Member Kemp also cited the last sentence of §163-234 (3): The State Board of Elections shall provide instructions to county boards of elections for executing this procedure, and the instructions shall be designed to ensure the accuracy of the count, the participation of board members of both parties, and the secrecy of the results before election day. Board Minutes – 04/11/2023 Page | 9 Member Kemp said he has asked to see those instructions and he understands the State Board has not produced them. Chair Carter said these instructions may have been given piecemeal; there is no one set of instructions. Chair Carter summarized the discussion as he understood it. Member Kemp has articulated a process by which he contends this Board can accomplish two separate objectives. First, it can comply with the requirement not to tally the weekly absentee-by- mail ballots before Election Day. Second, the Board can generate a results report from the DS850 for the absentee-by-mail ballots on Election Day, between Election Day and the final canvass meeting, or both. Member Kemp would reconcile the two statutory requirements either by (i) scanning all approved absentee-by-mail ballots a second time, or by (ii) holding them all for scanning on Election Day. He cited N.C. Gen. Stat. §163- 182.5(b) as support: The county board shall examine the returns from precincts, from absentee official ballots, from the sample hand-to-eye paper ballot counts, and from provisional official ballots and shall conduct the canvass. In response to a question from Chair Carter, Member Kemp said he interprets “returns” to mean the results tapes or results reports. Member Kemp said this Board is equating entry into the Electionware software with “counting.” In his view, the Electionware software compiles all the results, generates a secure data file, and loads the results electronically to the State Board. It does not actually count or tally the results. Member Kemp believes that the Board is saying that the DS850 is not counting, but in fact it is tabulating votes, it is just not reporting those results until Election Day when the weekly USBs are inserted into the Electionware software. He questioned whether the Electionware software is certified to count votes. Chair Carter called on Director Hunter-Havens to tell the Board what “the county Board shall examine the returns” means to her. Director Hunter-Havens said the canvass documentation presented to the Board reflects the returns from all voting methods, captured in the canvass report including One Stop, absentee-by-mail, Election Day, and approved provisional ballots. Those reports are presented to the Board along with all the canvass documentation, including the results of the sample hand-eye count for verification of the results, which the Board certifies. Chair Carter said, while the Director does not print a weekly results report from the scanning of the approved absentee-by-mail ballots, she does print a report of the number of scanned ballots by precinct, allowing a weekly reconciliation at that level. He understands that is not exactly what Member Kemp is looking for, but it is a layer of reconciliation. Board Minutes – 04/11/2023 Page | 10 Member Kemp said the report that the Board is asked to sign shows zeroes next to absentee, provisional, and transfer. He contended that it is not sufficient to meet the requirement of N.C. Gen. Stat. §163-182.5 (b): The county board of elections shall meet at 11:00 A.M. on the tenth day after every election to complete the canvass of votes cast and to authenticate the count in every ballot item in the county by determining that the votes have been counted and tabulated correctly. Director Hunter-Havens said that information is presented in the Summary by Precinct Report and the Election Summary Report, which show what Member Kemp is looking for. She agreed to show those reports to Member Kemp. Chair Carter acknowledged that Member Kemp did not have much time to review the supporting reports before voting to certify the final canvass. Member Kemp said the other Board members had already voted to certify the canvass when he returned from observing the manual entry of changes based on the challenge hearing decisions the Board made during the canvass meeting, in place of scanning the affected ballots. Director Hunter-Havens said that manual entry is permitted, and the Board authorized it. Chair Carter said his fundamental concern is that the Board not make up additional requirements and make the vote to approve the canvass contingent on those additional requirements if they are not found in the statute or administrative guidance. If there is not a legal requirement, it is not the place of this Board or an individual member to say unless I see more, I am not able to vote to approve the canvass. While Member Kemp has asked for things citing the statute and believing that he is not asking for anything more than what the statute requires, Chair Carter said he is not seeing the requirement in the statute. Member Kemp said he saw additional support for his request in SBE Numbered Memo 2018-05, parts of which are no longer applicable but have not yet been replaced. Chair Carter said he can agree that 2018-05 should be updated. Chair Carter asked Member Kemp if there was anything else he felt was missing in the final canvass, aside from a weekly report of the absentee-by-mail results. Member Kemp said that, because the weekly results are blended into the precincts on this report, there is no way to match the accuracy of the reported numbers. Chair Carter said that the summary reports that Director Hunter-Havens identified would provide that information. Member Kemp said he would be glad to review those reports. Member Kemp recalled that for the Final Canvass for the primary election in May 2022, he was asked to sign the canvass when presented with a stack of four sets of results where one stack was smaller than the other three, suggesting to him the fourth was incomplete. That was the level of his review, and he was not satisfied. With this canvass, he asked for information to review and to compare against the statute to see if the concerns he had previously were substantiated. He believes they were substantiated. Board Minutes – 04/11/2023 Page | 11 Member Kemp believes the Board should do more than a pro forma canvass, which is the review and verification of the results. He referred to the staff Reconciliation Report which addresses fifteen pages of One Stop daily reconciliations and eight pages of Election Day reconciliations, but nothing on absentee-by-mail. Member Kemp said the packet that Chair Carter put together on absentee-by-mail weekly numbers was helpful, but accounted for ballots, not contest results. He said that, in voting to approve the Final Canvass, the Board is saying it has reviewed every count in every contest and certified the numbers. Chair Carter said he disagreed. Even if the Board did not review the absentee-by-mail numbers in great detail during the Final Canvass meeting, the Board did conduct that review each week, on Election Day, and in the time leading up to the Final Canvass meeting. Member Kemp agreed to review the additional reports Director Hunter-Havens offered at a later time. Director Hunter-Havens said the Reconciliation Reports for Election Day and One Stop Early Voting (OSEV) are prepared because the incidents summarized in those reports occur outside of a public Board meeting. By contrast, the Board is present during the weekly Special Absentee meetings when the preparatory steps of opening and scanning the approved absentee-by-mail ballots take place. In that context, the Board makes decisions on any questions as they arise, so there is no need for a detailed Reconciliation Report for the Final Canvass. By contrast, with respect to absentee ballots cast at OSEV sites and with respect to provisional ballots, the issues initially arise outside of the Board’s presence and are managed by staff and precinct officials. The Board then approves (or disapproves, as the case may be) the provisional ballots based on the staff’s research. The Board is directly involved in the reconciliation of both of these voting methods. In addition, the pre- election testing protocols validate the reported results. Chair Carter shared an email, dated November 7, 2022, with Member Kemp. Chair Carter asked Member Kemp whether he recalled receiving it. After reading it, Member Kemp said he did not recall having seen it. He also opined that the last paragraph is not factually correct. He said the Board is not permitted to produce a results report before Election Day. But on and after Election Day, the Board produces a results result, by contest, for every ballot scanned on the DS850. The last paragraph of the email says that cannot be done. Chair Carter read the email for the benefit of the others present. He said it was written by the State Board of Elections in response to a question the Republican Party asked before the election which is the same question currently before the Board. I realize the email below references a zero-results tape4 produced from the DS850 at the beginning of each absentee meeting. Unlike the M650, which had the 4 Chair Carter noted that, because our office now uses a DS850, and because the DS850 generates documents in a different format that the older DS200s, the reference to a “zero-results tape” should be read to mean a “zero-results report.” Board Minutes – 04/11/2023 Page | 12 ability to save scanned ballot data onto a zip disc and then restore those data to the tabulator at a later time in order to resume scanning ballots as part of the same overall set of data, the DS850 does not allow this. Once you have completed scanning ballots, you may print a number of reports. But after the stick has been pulled and the internal memory cleared, there is no way to restore it. I believe New Hanover County personnel are doing everything they are supposed to be doing, and more to the point, not doing what they absolutely should not be doing. In summary, (a) the DS850 does not produce tapes, and (b) the only way to have the DS850 produce results reports which would be analogous to the DS200 results tapes would be for the CBE to produce such reports at each absentee Board meeting, which is something the county boards are prohibited from doing. Member Kemp said that last paragraph is not true, that the Board does see reports on and after Election Day from the DS850. Director Hunter-Haven said the distinction is that results tapes from the DS200s are printed after the close of the One Stop Early Voting sites on the final day of early voting, and they are also printed at the close of the polls on Election Day. Those tapes show contest by contest the number of votes cast on each DS200, with signature lines for the chief judge and judges to certify each tape. The DS850 does not produce that type of tape with signature lines. It can produce various administrative reports and staff runs the reports we are permitted to produce at each absentee Board meeting. But we are not legally permitted to run a results report before Election Day that breaks out the votes by contest and by candidate. Chair Carter said Member Kemp has identified a constructive solution that satisfies his reading of the statutes, the Numbered Memo, and his concerns. In response to a question from Chair Carter, Member Kemp said the Board is required to certify the contest results for all ballots cast. He said the Board does not see the contest results for the absentee-by- mail ballots reviewed in the Board’s weekly absentee meetings until the final canvass report produced by the Electionware software in the secure office. The reports are not generated by the DS850, the machine into which the ballots themselves are scanned and which was pre-tested and certified as accurately counting ballots. Instead, the reports that the Board sees are generated by the Electionware software. Chair Carter said the data is saved from the DS850 and taken to the Electionware machine to produce the canvass report. Director Hunter-Havens said the data is saved from the DS850, and then inserted into the Electionware machine which compiles the weekly results together and produces a results report. This data is transmitted to the State Board of Elections for publication. Secretary Miller said he understands the point of contention is this: Member Kemp proposes an innovative procedure, essentially a recount-like procedure, that provides him with data he feels he needs to certify the canvass. Based on the canvass of the May primary, which the entire Board certified, when was this level of data recognized as needed before this canvass? If we all came into this canvass knowing what the canvass Board Minutes – 04/11/2023 Page | 13 reports look like, when did Member Kemp request additional data as a requirement for his approving the canvass? Member Kemp said he did not recall. Chair Carter said that raises a question that Secretary Miller asked two months ago. Member Kemp has said that his actions are calculated to assuage the doubts of people prone to election denial. How does voting against finalizing the canvass in November on this basis reassure someone who questions the integrity of elections? Member Kemp said the appearance of pro forma approval is not a good look when there is no report showing the weekly reconciliation of the weekly totals by contest. How can the Board rely on those figures? For example, there is no sample hand-eye count of the weekly absentee ballots to confirm their accuracy. Chair Carter said the weekly absentee ballots are included in the totals, even if not broken out by precinct. Director Hunter- Havens said that data is shown in the contest results by precinct in the reports that Member Kemp requested this evening. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further discussion, Chair Carter called for a motion to adjourn. Secretary moved that the meeting adjourn at 7:01 p.m., second by Member Hunter. Motion carried unanimously. The next Board meeting is scheduled to be held on May 9, 2023, at 5:15 p.m., at the Board of Elections office, Long Leaf Room, 1241A Military Cutoff Road, Wilmington, NC. APPROVED BY: RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: _______________________________ _____________________________ DERRICK R. MILLER RAE HUNTER-HAVENS SECRETARY ELECTIONS DIRECTOR Regular Meeting New Hanover County Board of Elections May 9, 2023 Subject: Public Comment Summary: This is an opportunity for members of the public to provide comment on elections-related matters. Each commenter will be limited to two minutes with a twenty-minute limit total for all public comments. Board Action Required: Discuss as necessary Item # 1d Item # 2 Regular Meeting New Hanover County Board of Elections May 9, 2023 Subject: Director’s Report Summary: a.Financial Update The attached reports provide the Board with a budget update, including the following: •Salaries and Benefits expended through FY22-23 10th Period (April) •Operating Expenses expended through FY22-23 10th Period (April) •Grand Total expended through FY22-23 10th Period (April) b.List Maintenance Update Per data provided from the Statewide Elections Information Management System (SEIMS), the New Hanover County Board of Elections completed the following: •Removed 344 voters from the voter registration rolls in April 2023, consistent with NC Gen. Stat. §163-82.14. •Processed 807 new registration forms, 391 duplicate registration forms, and 632 registration updates in April 2023. c.Legal Updates The North Carolina Supreme Court issued three rulings on Friday, April 28, 2023, that impact elections administration across the state. The rulings affect felon voting rights, photo ID, and redistricting. A brief summary of these rulings and the initial actions taken by the state and county boards of elections are summarized below. •Felon Voting Rights (CSI v. Moore) – Per order of the NC Supreme Court, North Carolinians convicted of felonies must complete their sentences-including any prison time and any period of probation, post-release supervision, or parole- before they regain their right to register and vote. Previously, on April 26, 2022, the NC Court of Appeals ruled that anyone who was not in prison or jail for a felony conviction could register to vote and vote, provided they were otherwise eligible. For the 2022 General Election, felons who were not incarcerated were eligible to register and vote. The ruling by the NC Supreme Court on April 28, 2023 reversed the lower court ruling on the voting rights of individuals convicted of felonies. The State Board has updated the voter registration form on their web site. County boards of elections have been instructed to print and use the new forms immediately to ensure that no ineligible individual is led to believe they are permitted to register to vote. Our office has replaced all printed registration forms with the updated form. As of now, we have been advised to process any voter registration forms that we receive with the previous Item # 2 Item # 3 felon language on the form. The State Board will work with all stakeholders in the coming days to update our data feed from the Department of Adult Corrections (formerly Department of Public Safety) to ensure that the registration denial and removal processes in SEIMS are updated to reflect the eligibility criteria. They will also update voting forms that address eligibility criteria, in advance of elections this fall. •Holmes v. Moore (Photo ID) - The NC Supreme Court reversed an injunction against implementation of photo ID legislation. A permanent injunction was entered by a three-judge Superior Court panel on September 17, 2021, preventing the implementation of the Photo ID laws enacted in 2018 and 2019. As a result of the NC Supreme Court reversal, photo ID laws will be implemented moving forward, starting with the municipal elections in September, October, and November 2023. The State Board has already began taking preparatory steps for implementing Photo ID. Further guidance will be forthcoming about next steps for implementation. •Harper v. Hall: NCLCV v Hall (redistricting) – The NC Supreme Court reversed its prior rulings on this issue and ruled that the partisan gerrymandering claims based on the state constitution cannot serve as the basis of a lawsuit in state courts. As a result, the Court disavowed prior rulings that required the legislature to redraw districts that were originally enacted in 2021, and which required congressional elections in 2022 under a court-ordered map. Going forward, the Court has given the General Assembly the opportunity to enact all new districts for state house, state senate, and U.S. House for 2024. As a practical matter, the General Assembly must enact any new districts before candidate filing in December, and counties should be prepared to take required steps when new districts are enacted. Document/s Included: Financial Year-To-Date Budget Report 10th Period (April); NVRA Report from April 2023; NVRA Visualizations Report; NVRA Report Definitions Board Action Required: Discuss as necessary NEW HANOVER COUNTY - LIVE YEAR-TO-DATE BUDGET REPORT Report generated: 05/02/2023 14:07User: rhavensProgram ID: glytdbud Page 1 FOR 2023 10 ACCOUNTS FOR: ORIGINAL TRANFRS/ REVISED AVAILABLE PCT110 GENERAL FUND APPROP ADJSTMTS BUDGET YTD EXPENDED ENCUMBRANCES BUDGET USED 16 BOARD OF ELECTIONS 60 SALARIES & BENEFITS 11016100 610000 SALARIES AND WA 460,334 0 460,334 401,601.44 .00 58,732.56 87.2% 11016100 611500 CASUAL PART TIM 341,867 0 341,867 264,853.67 .00 77,013.33 77.5% 11016100 611600 OVERTIME PAY (O 8,227 0 8,227 8,384.67 .00 -157.67 101.9% 11016100 621000 SOCIAL SECURITY 34,809 0 34,809 35,943.24 .00 -1,134.24 103.3% 11016100 622000 RETIREMENT-LOCA 55,884 0 55,884 48,684.83 .00 7,199.17 87.1% 11016100 623500 GENERAL 401-K M 11,509 0 11,509 10,025.97 .00 1,483.03 87.1% 11016100 625000 MEDICAL INSURAN 76,216 0 76,216 57,277.02 .00 18,938.98 75.2% 11016100 626000 LONG TERM DISAB 1,243 0 1,243 666.37 .00 576.63 53.6% TOTAL SALARIES & BENEFITS 990,089 0 990,089 827,437.21 .00 162,651.79 83.6% 70 OPERATING EXPENSES 11016100 700000 CONTR SERVS 191,057 0 191,057 219,193.39 5,816.14 -33,952.53 117.8% 11016100 700330 RENT 1,750 0 1,750 125.00 .00 1,625.00 7.1% 11016100 700350 ADVERTISING COS 2,025 0 2,025 1,392.60 .00 632.40 68.8% 11016100 700365 CELLULAR EXPENS 0 0 0 11,328.88 .00 -11,328.88 100.0% 11016100 700370 POSTAGE EXPENSE 38,980 0 38,980 28,715.46 .00 10,264.54 73.7% 11016100 700430 M&R-EQUIPMENT 50,855 0 50,855 53,397.75 .00 -2,542.75 105.0% 11016100 700500 PRINTING 54,795 0 54,795 59,656.44 .00 -4,861.44 108.9% 11016100 700512 PRINTER-COPIER 7,000 0 7,000 8,193.58 .00 -1,193.58 117.1% 11016100 700520 SUPPLIES 84,495 0 84,495 33,147.64 .00 51,347.36 39.2% 11016100 700700 DUES & SUBSCRIP 470 0 470 129.99 .00 340.01 27.7% 11016100 700825 EMPLOYEE REIMBU 250 0 250 1,534.70 .00 -1,284.70 613.9% 11016100 700905 TRAINING & TRAV 6,500 0 6,500 1,726.11 .00 4,773.89 26.6% 11016100 701050 INSURANCE&BONDS 66,326 -41,890 24,436 23,435.48 .00 1,000.52 95.9% TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 504,503 -41,890 462,613 441,977.02 5,816.14 14,819.84 96.8% TOTAL BOARD OF ELECTIONS 1,494,592 -41,890 1,452,702 1,269,414.23 5,816.14 177,471.63 87.8% TOTAL GENERAL FUND 1,494,592 -41,890 1,452,702 1,269,414.23 5,816.14 177,471.63 87.8% TOTAL EXPENSES 1,494,592 -41,890 1,452,702 1,269,414.23 5,816.14 177,471.63 NEW HANOVER COUNTY - LIVE YEAR-TO-DATE BUDGET REPORT Report generated: 05/02/2023 14:07User: rhavensProgram ID: glytdbud Page 2 FOR 2023 10 ORIGINAL TRANFRS/ REVISED AVAILABLE PCT APPROP ADJSTMTS BUDGET YTD EXPENDED ENCUMBRANCES BUDGET USED GRAND TOTAL 1,494,592 -41,890 1,452,702 1,269,414.23 5,816.14 177,471.63 87.8% ** END OF REPORT - Generated by RAE HUNTER-HAVENS ** NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS NVRA REPORT Reporting Period:-4/1/2023 4/30/2023 Totals Active 150,299 Inactive 24,800 Total Registration 175,099 REPORTING PERIOD Registrations Approved 921 Total Registrations Removed 344 Inactive Registrations Removed 62 New Registrations 00 - No Application Source 1 01 - Public Assistance 13 02 - Disability 1 03 - Other (ESC) 0 04 - Armed Forces 0 05 - DMV 707 06 - Mail-in 13 07 - In-person 3 08 - Library & High School 1 09 - Spanish Language Application 0 10 - Online Registration 15 17 - Registration Drives 51 21 - Medicaid Renewal 2 96 - Temporary FWAB Registrant 0 97 - Temporary FPCA Registrant 0 807 Duplicates 00 - No Application Source 0 01 - Public Assistance 4 02 - Disability 0 03 - Other (ESC) 0 04 - Armed Forces 0 05 - DMV 251 06 - Mail-in 28 07 - In-person 0 08 - Library & High School 1 09 - Spanish Language Application 0 10 - Online Registration 10 17 - Registration Drives 4 21 - Medicaid Renewal 4 95 - Voter Return of NCOA 39 96 - Temporary FWAB Registrant 0 97 - Temporary FPCA Registrant 0 98 - Voter Change On Confirmation 34 vtr_nvra_stat.rpt Page 1 of 5May 02, 2023 1:24 pm NVRA REPORTNEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS 99 - Voter Change On Verification 16 391 vtr_nvra_stat.rpt Page 2 of 5May 02, 2023 1:24 pm NVRA REPORTNEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS Changes of Information 00 - No Application Source 4 01 - Public Assistance 11 02 - Disability 0 03 - Other (ESC) 0 04 - Armed Forces 0 05 - DMV 458 06 - Mail-in 23 07 - In-person 6 08 - Library & High School 0 09 - Spanish Language Application 0 10 - Online Registration 53 17 - Registration Drives 22 21 - Medicaid Renewal 1 95 - Voter Return of NCOA 33 96 - Temporary FWAB Registrant 0 97 - Temporary FPCA Registrant 0 98 - Voter Change On Confirmation 12 99 - Voter Change On Verification 9 632 Verifications # of 1st & 2nd verification mailings sent 1,476 # of 1st NCOA mailings sent 0 # of 1st verification returned undeliverable 2,291 # of verification returned by voter 25 Confirmations # of confirmations returned by voter 43 # of confirmations sent 2,253 # of confirmations returned undeliverable 133 # of confirmations not returned at all 40 COUNTY STATISTICAL Constitution 0 Democratic 50,150 Green 27 Libertarian 1,469 Republican 52,893 Unaffiliated 70,560 American Indian 380 Asian 1,358 Black 18,809 Multi-Racial 835 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 12 White 134,420 Other 3,838 Undesignated 15,447 Hispanic 3,805 Not Hispanic 115,552 Undesignated 55,742 vtr_nvra_stat.rpt Page 3 of 5May 02, 2023 1:24 pm NVRA REPORTNEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS Female 85,504 Male 72,629 Undesignated 16,966 Unprocessed Registrations - Incomplete Queue 00 - No Application Source 6 01 - Public Assistance 6 02 - Disability 1 03 - Other (ESC) 0 04 - Armed Forces 0 05 - DMV 144 06 - Mail-in 15 07 - In-person 0 08 - Library & High School 0 09 - Spanish Language Application 0 10 - Online Registration 0 17 - Registration Drives 56 21 - Medicaid Renewal 2 95 - Voter Return of NCOA 16 96 - Temporary FWAB Registrant 0 97 - Temporary FPCA Registrant 0 98 - Voter Change On Confirmation 12 99 - Voter Change On Verification 0 Unprocessed Registrations - Archive Queue 00 - No Application Source 0 01 - Public Assistance 0 02 - Disability 0 03 - Other (ESC) 0 04 - Armed Forces 0 05 - DMV 0 06 - Mail-in 0 07 - In-person 0 08 - Library & High School 0 09 - Spanish Language Application 0 10 - Online Registration 0 17 - Registration Drives 0 21 - Medicaid Renewal 0 95 - Voter Return of NCOA 2 96 - Temporary FWAB Registrant 0 97 - Temporary FPCA Registrant 0 98 - Voter Change On Confirmation 0 99 - Voter Change On Verification 0 Unprocessed Registrations - Review Queue 00 - No Application Source 0 01 - Public Assistance 0 02 - Disability 0 03 - Other (ESC) 0 04 - Armed Forces 0 05 - DMV 46 06 - Mail-in 7 07 - In-person 0 vtr_nvra_stat.rpt Page 4 of 5May 02, 2023 1:24 pm NVRA REPORTNEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS 08 - Library & High School 0 09 - Spanish Language Application 0 10 - Online Registration 2 17 - Registration Drives 1 21 - Medicaid Renewal 0 96 - Temporary FWAB Registrant 0 97 - Temporary FPCA Registrant 0 vtr_nvra_stat.rpt Page 5 of 5May 02, 2023 1:24 pm 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 APPROVED REG REMOVED REG NVRA Monthly Statistics: Total Removed and Approved Registrations Jan-21 Feb-21 Mar-21 Apr-21 May-21 Jun-21 July-21 Aug-21 Sep-21 Oct-21 Nov-21 Dec-21 Jan-22 Feb-22 Mar-22 Apr-22 May-22 Jun-22 Jul-22 Aug-22 Sep-22 Oct-22 Nov-22 Dec-22 Jan-23 Feb-23 Mar-23 Apr-23 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 NEW DMV REG NEW REG ALL OTHERS DMV DUPLICATES ALL OTHER DUPLICATES DMV INFO CHANGE ALL OTHER INFO CHANGE NVRA Monthly Statistics: Voter Registrations Jan-21 Feb-21 Mar-21 Apr-21 May-21 Jun-21 July-21 Aug-21 Sep-21 Oct-21 Nov-21 Dec-21 Jan-22 Feb-22 Mar-22 Apr-22 May-22 Jun-22 Jul-22 Aug-22 Sep-22 Oct-22 Nov-22 Dec-22 Jan-23 Feb-23 Mar-23 Apr-23 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 1ST & 2ND VERIFICATIONS MAILED 1ST NCOA MAILED UNDELIVERABLE 1ST VERFICATION RETURNED VERIFICATIONS MAILED CONFIRMATIONS RETURNED CONFIRMATIONS UNDELIVERABLE CONFIRMATIONS NVRA Monthly Statistics: Voter Card Mailings Jan-21 Feb-21 Mar-21 Apr-21 May-21 Jun-21 July-21 Aug-21 Sep-21 Oct-21 Nov-21 Dec-21 Jan-22 Feb-22 Mar-22 Apr-22 May-22 Jun-22 Jul-22 Aug-22 Sep-22 Oct-22 Nov-22 Dec-22 Jan-23 Feb-23 Mar-23 Apr-23 NVRA The SBE has an automated process, so there is no need to submit the report on a monthly basis, it is available for counties that would like to run the report for informational use. NVRA Report definitions: Prior to reviewing the NVRA report the following items need to be considered  Statistics are based on a time period  Temporary voters are ignored in these statistics.  These are interpretations of the SEIMS NVRA reports, not anything generated outside the SEIMS application.  See NVRA change explanation in the supplemental section. Description Definition Registrations Approved Number of verified voters during the time period. This is based off the following verification description: ‘NEW VOTER: VERIFIED’ Total Registrations Removed Number of voters that had their status changed to REMOVED during the time period Inactive Registrations Removed Number of voters that had their status changed from INACTIVE to REMOVED during the time period Total Registrations Removed Number of voters that had their status changed to REMOVED during the time period New Number of NVRA flagged new voter records by source code during the time period. Sources ‘15’, ‘17’, ‘19’ are combined into ‘05’, ‘07’, ‘09’ respectively. Sources ‘98’ and ‘99’ are ignored because these are change source codes Change Number of NVRA flagged change voter records by source code during the time period. Sources ‘15’, ‘17’, ‘19’ are combined into ‘05’, ‘07’, ‘09’ respectively Duplicate Number of NVRA flagged duplicate voter records by source code during the time period. Sources ‘15’, ‘17’, ‘19’ are combined into ‘05’, ‘07’, ‘09’ respectively Verification:# of 1st & 2nd verification mailings sent This is based off the following verification descriptions: ‘NEW VOTER: 1ST VERIFICATION PENDING’, ‘NEW VOTER: 2ND VERIFICATION PENDING’, ‘VOTER CHG: 1ST VERIFICATION PENDING’, ‘VOTER CHG: 1ST VERIFICATION PENDING’, ‘LIST MAINT: 1ST VERIFICATION PENDING’ Verification:# of 1st verification returned undeliverable Number of 1st verification mailings returned undeliverable to the county during the time period. This is based off the following verification descriptions: ‘NEW VOTER: ADDR CONFIRMATION TO FWD ADDR (PRIOR TO MAILING)’, ‘NEW VOTER: 2ND VERIFICATION (PRIOR TO MAILING)’, ‘VOTER CHG: ADDR CONFIRMATION TO FWD ADDR (PRIOR TO MAILING)’, ‘VOTER CHG: ADDR CONFIRMATION TO OLD ADDR (PRIOR TO MAILING) Verification:# of verification returned by voter Number of verifications returned to the county by the voter during the time period. This is based off of source code ‘99’ changes Confirmation:# of confirmations returned by voter Number of verifications returned to the county by the voter during the time period. This is based off of source code ‘98’ changes Confirmation:# of confirmations sent Number of verifications returned to the county by the voter during the time period. This is based off of source code ‘98’ changes Confirmation:# of confirmations returned undeliverable Number of confirmation mailings returned undeliverable to the county during the time period. This is based off the reason changes to ‘CONFIRMATION RETURNED UNDELIVERABLE’ Confirmation:# of confirmations not returned at all Number of confirmation mailings not returned to the county at all during the time period. This is based off the reason changes to ‘CONFIRMATION NOT RETURNED’ Supplemental Explanation – NVRA Change/Duplicate Description For 1/7/2012 forward: NOTE: An NVRA Voter Change is marked if one of the following fields is changed (with a non-administrative change).  Name  Mailing Address  Birth Date Party Residential Address NOTE: An NVRA Duplicate is marked if a voter change occurs but was not one of the fields indicated above to represent an NVRA change. Prior to 1/7/2012: NOTE: An NVRA Voter Change is marked if any of the fields below are updated for a voter. Drivers license Gender Confidential Flag Race Party Precinct Mailing Address Status Municipality Phone number Name Ward Birth date Residential Address SSN NOTE: An NVRA Duplicate is flagged if none of the above occur, but one of the following fields are changed: Reason Registration date Source Application date Comments Language Regular Meeting New Hanover County Board of Elections May 9, 2023 Subject: General Discussion Summary: This is an opportunity for discussion on other elections-related matters not included in the meeting agenda. Board Action Required: Discuss As Necessary Item # 4