Feuding officials still fussing

Feuding officials still fussing

War of words over voting issues continues between justices, election commissioners

news@theeveningtimes.com

Crittenden County Election Commission say the old voting machines they gave to neighboring counties belonged to the manufacturer, not the county, and that the Quorum Court was aware of the agreement because they voted to approve it on two occasions.

The commission’s two Republican members responded to criticism _ specifically by Quorum Court Justice Vickie Robertson — that they “gave away” county property in a memo sent to the Quorum Court on July 27.

Election Commission Chair Dixie Carlson and Commissioner Frank Barton made it clear that the old voting machines were traded to Electronic Systems & Software (ES& S) as part of an agreement between the State, the County, and ES& S.

“When we brought the matter up in 2018, we presented this information again to the Quorum Court, and once again the Quorum Court approved the agreement that outlines that the old equipment was traded to ES& S,” the memo states. The State made $4 million available in 2018 to counties to purchase new voting machines and agreed to pay 50 percent of the cost. The State gave Crittenden County $287,816 to buy new equipment.

ES& S and the State encouraged counties to give the old machines away to other counties who did not receive the newer equipment because they were just going to destroy them and take them to the landfill.

The Quorum Court tabled a resolution to the Secretary of State’s Office approving the deal until they could get clarification about who owned the machines.

ES& S — at Robertson’s urging — sent a clarifying e-mail stating that they did not want the old machines back and that the county was free to dispose of the machines however they wanted.

The Election Commission gave away some of the 100 old machines to neighbor- ing counties. Robertson expressed shock and dismay at the July meeting that the machines were given away, claiming the Court asked the Election Commission to hold off until they could determine whether they could legally give away county property, and that the Election Commission should have informed County Judge Woody Wheeless.

But according to the memo from the Election Commission, the machines belonged to ES& S — and not the county — and ES& S wanted them to go to counties who needed them.

Furthermore, they said County Judge Woody Wheeless was told by ES& S and the Secretary of State’s Office to give the machine to any county who wanted them.

“Both the State and ES& S desired that the trade-in equipment be put back to use by other counties in the state that are not getting new equipment this year,” the memo states.

The memo informed the Justices that they contacted Wheeless requesting guidance from him as to what documentation he wanted about the machines they were making available to other counties.

“Judge Wheeless requested us to send a memo to the County Clerk stating what counties picked up equipment and how many were picked up,” the memo states. “This we did per the Judge’s instructions. Additionally, we kept a record of the serial numbers of the machines that were picked up.”

Carlson said she hopes their answers clear up that the old voting machines ceased to be county property with the purchase of the new equipment, and that subsequent disposal was under the direction of the County Judge.

“I hope this satisfies them that we didn’t own the equipment to begin with,” Carlson said. “Their argument about us giving away county property is wrong.

They voted on it twice.

They should have known that.”

Robertson and other justices have threatened to withhold funding from the Election Commission if they don’t show up to answer questions at the August

meeting.

Carlson said the Quorum Court can not withhold funds to run an election, and that the election coordinator has a contract.

“I don’t know where they think that they could,” Carlson said. “That contract is not up. And the Judge hires the coordinator. He is the one who signs their contract.”

Carlson said she is not sure whether members of the Election Commission will be at the August meeting, but said if the Quorum Court has any further questions that they should put them in writing.

“They can’t demand that we be there,” Carlson said.

“If they have any questions for us, we would like them in writing. We will return the answers in writing.”

By Mark Randall