Special Call Pre-Certification Meeting
11/7/24
4:45 pm
1. ROLL CALL
Karli Swift, Chair – present
Vasu Abhiraman, Vice Chair – present
Nancy Jester, Acting Chair – present
Susan Motter – present
Tony Lewis – present
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Approved 5 – 0
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Liz Throop thanked BRE members and staI, noting addition of signage at previous Early Voting places and bomb threat responses.
4. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION
A. Director’s Report
Director Smith commended staI, county partners who helped process registrations, poll workers, runners who transported CF cards from polling places, the Chief of Police, and the BRE for their work on the general election.
Smith then presented the unofficial reconciliation results by precinct per SEB Rule 183-1- 12 (12), in which ballots cast were compared to unique voter check-ins per Poll Pad counts. BRE members reviewed handouts of the spreadsheet, which listed all precincts in which the number of ballots cast, and the number of check-ins were not the same. (Columns on the spreadsheet were labeled Precinct / Ballots Cast / Unique Voter ID / Cast minus ID / Method of Voting. Smith clarified that “Cast minus ID” shows the net discrepancy for a given polling place.)
Smith noted these were based on unofficial and incomplete tallies. These numbers were broken down by voting method (ABM, AIP, or ED). She explained that voters whose information did not appear on Poll Pads were added manually to the numbered list of voters. The total errors for all precincts was 190.
Smith mentioned staI’s evaluation of whether GARVIS results, ePulse results, and the numbered list of voters all matched. StaI is still making sure all ballots cast were scanned or otherwise accounted for. She gave examples of why there were variations, such as an Absentee by Mail voter returning ID but not a ballot.
Jester requested a full report on reasons for variations be provided by the 11/12 meeting. Director Smith agrees and says they would produce such a document for the 30-day report to the SOS anyway.
Chair Swift noted that this meeting was in fulfillment of the new Georgia legal requirement to hold a pre-certification meeting prior to certification, but results are not final and hence the board will not vote on what was presented.
Atty Momo clarified that the Board is required by SEB Rule 183-1-12 (12) to continue to investigate these discrepancies, via the Elections Department.
5. EXECUTIVE SESSION
NA
6. BOARD COMMENTS
Swift and Jester thank Election staI and other county workers.
7. ADJOURNMENT
5 pm
Be First to Comment