Chapter Four

The state of Florida provides an annual fiscal mechanism to address the state’s budgetary needs for election matters. However, Florida residents receive direct Election Day resources from their respective county supervisors of elections offices. These county offices depend primarily on appropriations from their respective boards of county commissioners, and receive limited state funding. As a result, factors such as, varying county budgetary limits and the lack of state funding initiatives to supervisors of elections offices create an opportunity for an unequal distribution of election resources and thus the possibility of voter disenfranchisement.

Financial resources are allocated for public needs through Florida’s budget process. The state’s budgetary fiscal year begins in July, while its legislature convenes annually from March to May.[2]

The budgetary process begins when Florida’s state agencies present their appropriation requests to the governor each September. These requests are based on agencies’ perceptions of their anticipated long-term program planning needs. The Governor’s Office of Policy and Budget analyzes these requests and offers its findings to the governor.[3] The governor then compares the proposed budgets with the state’s available financial resources and program priorities, and submits his fiscal recommendations to the Florida legislature in January.[4] During the next phase of the budget development process, the legislature reviews the governor’s proposed budget and receives feedback from members of the public and agency officials in reference to anticipated fiscal allocations.[5] Lastly, as part of Florida’s legislative session, the state House of Representatives and the Senate each vote appropriations bills (i.e., “general appropriations bills”) for the state.[6] The Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President of the Senate ultimately sign the new General Appropriations Act.[7] The budgetary process is not completed until the governor signs the Act.[8] Although the governor of Florida has the authority to veto funding for line item budgetary requests, a majority vote in Florida’s House of Representatives and the Senate is still required to pass the state’s budget.[9]

According to Secretary of State Katherine Harris, the Division of Elections submits its budget requests to Florida’s legislature and the governor’s office, in accordance with the state’s appropriations process. Although the secretary of state does not directly communicate with the governor on budgetary issues, the division directors of her office interact with the governor’s staff on fiscal concerns.[10] The secretary of state also has the opportunity to submit a supplemental budget that can include requests for additional funding to Florida’s counties.[11]

In terms of overall fiscal authority, Jeb Bush, governor of the state of Florida testified before the Commission that he is responsible for funding election needs in the state, while the secretary of state is directly accountable for the Division of Elections. He explained that “funding to provide adequate training or for the [voting] machinery is determined by local county commissioners.” [12] However, Governor Bush anticipated that this policy may be changed with the advent of recommendations from the governor’s Select Task Force on Election Procedures, Standards and Technology, “recognizing that some counties handled this job, because of their machines, in a way that yielded a dramatically different result than others.”[13]

Katherine Harris, secretary of state, testified that her office is divided into seven divisions, including one for elections. This division is managed by a director—L. Clayton Roberts—who is responsible for implementing the secretary of state’s mandates. Ms. Harris is then accountable for supervising the operations and delegating daily operational functions to the division directors.[14] The director’s office of the Division of Elections serves as the secretary of state’s designee for functions pertaining to elections, such as:

In terms of resources allocated to the secretary of state’s office, in 2001, the office employs 709 full time equivalent employees (FTEs), with a $161 million budget.[16] Her office generates approximately $171 million in revenue.[17]

The following tables portray the Division of Election’s budget appropriations from fiscal year 1997 through fiscal year 2001. According to the data provided to the Commission, the Division was appropriated the greatest amount of funding of approximately $6.1 million in FY 1999–2000. The data also indicates that during the time period of FY 1997 through FY 2001, the Division employed the most full time equivalent employees (47) in FY 1997–FY 1998.[18]

Table 4-1: Division of Elections -
Appropriations for Fiscal Years 1999–2000 and 2000–2001

Source: State of Florida, BPEADL01 LAS/PBS System, Budget Period 1989-2000, Appropriation Category Summary, Exhibit A - “Issue Summary,” May 14, 1999 [excerpt]; State of Florida, BPEADL01 LAS/PBS System, Budget Period 1990-2001, Exhibit D-3A - “Expenditures by Issue and Appropriation Category.”

Note: But see Katherine Harris Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 289 (According to Secretary Harris, in 2001, the Division of Elections has 30 full time equivalent employees and is allocated approximately $5.4 million.).

Source: The figure of $4,600,000 is found “The Florida Government,” Office Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability, n.d., <http://www.oppaga.state.fl.us/profiles/4098/print.asp> (Mar. 17, 2001) (hereafter cited as FGAR ). For FY 2000-2001, the state appropriated $4.6 million in general revenue, and $1.3 million in trust funds.

State of Florida, BAALRL01 LAS/PBS System, 1997 Appropriation Ledger, Detail Report by Fund/Category, Tentative Original Approved Budget, June 29, 1997.

Note: The approved unreleased budget for the Division of Elections was $2,073,372 in FY 1998-1999.

Source: State of Florida, BPEXBL01 LAS/PBS System, Budget Period: 1989-2000, Exhibit B - “Appropriation Category Summary,” May 14, 1999.

In addition, Secretary of State Katherine Harris testified before the Commission that “cuts in the Division of Elections occurred prior to my election as secretary of state [in 1998].”[19] However, the above data indicates that the Division of Elections also experienced a decrease in state appropriations and full time equivalents from FY 1999–FY 2000 to FY 2000–2001.

The state of Florida provides minimal, if any, direct financial support for election resources. In fact, Jane Carroll, former supervisor of elections for Broward County maintained that she did not believe there was a legal provision that would have allowed her to request additional funding from the state’s Division of Elections, even if the financial resources were available.[20] James Roberts, Monroe County administrator also reinforced Ms. Carroll’s perspective, by stating “there is no provision in the state statute that automatically allows Monroe County to ask the state of Florida to provide money for elections.”[21] However, Mr. Roberts also indicated that legislative or administrative budget processes could be used to request supplemental funding for elections.[22]

Other current and former government officials expressed similar positions regarding the state’s contribution to local election needs:

The Division of Elections did, however, initiate some level of voter education outreach to Florida’s residents.[26] In April 2000, the Division entered into a contractual agreement with the Florida Cable Telecommunications Association to create a 30-second public service announcement (PSA) in English to educate Florida’s residents on voter fraud.[27] The Division of Elections paid $20,000 for the PSA.[28] The announcement aired between 6 a.m. and midnight from August 1, 2000, through November 7, 2000, in nine primary cable television areas in Florida.[29]

Subsequently, in August 2000, the Division of Elections also contracted with Next Generation Network, Inc., a for-profit Minnesota corporation to provide locations to display voter fraud public service announcements in Florida.[30] Next Generation Network, owns and operates video monitors in 706 convenience stores in the state, which are primarily used to broadcast messages of interest to the general public.[31] Pursuant to the Division’s contract with Next Generation Network, Inc., the state paid $11,469.50 for these services.[32] Similarly, the director of the Division of Elections testified before the Commission that “[w]e provide posters to the supervisor of elections in Spanish and English, which are posted in the polling place that explain to the voters the basics of voting….As far as the mechanics of voting and showing voters how to vote, we do not participate in that because different counties have different systems.”[33]

The Division of Elections then entered into an agreement in September 2000 with the Victory Group, Inc., a Maryland communications and media firm, to produce a 30-second television commercial entitled, “The Power,” in order to reinforce the “Get Out to Vote” campaign in Florida.[34] General Norman Schwartzkopf appeared in this advertisement.[35] The total cost to the Division of Elections for the commercial was $34,500.[36]

In spite of this, some members of the public remained skeptical about the effectiveness of the Division of Elections’ voter outreach efforts. According to Tony Hill, a former State Representative, “[t]he ad featured [Secretary of State Katherine Harris] at the beaches and thoroughbred horses and Norman Schwartzkopf. The message was not directed at voters least likely to vote. The code was protection of freedom, the question is for whom.”[37] Mr. Hill stated that the public services announcement was “a waste of time.”[38] In contrast, Mr. Roberts indicated that his office did not receive any requests from local county election officials that they were in dire need of state assistance for their election preparation initiatives.[39]

Nevertheless, one supervisor of elections maintained that the foundation was already established for the state’s inadequate allocation of Election Day recourses prior to the November 2000 election.[40] According to Mr. Sancho, when Katherine Harris was campaigning for her current position as secretary of state, her campaign platform did not focus on reforming Florida’s election process.[41] Instead, the emphasis was placed on other state program areas, such as cultural affairs, and international trade relationships. In addition, once Ms. Harris was elected as secretary of state, a number of her Division of Elections staff left their positions and were replaced by new and inexperienced employees.[42] Mr. Sancho then concluded that these two factors contributed to one of the reasons why county supervisors of elections “didn’t depend on that office this year because simply they were too new. We knew more about the [elections] process than they did.”[43]

Florida’s county supervisors of elections generally anticipate a lack of state financial resources for election needs, such as voter education outreach in their respective counties. As a result, county supervisors of elections either try to seek financial assistance from their respective boards of county commissioners, supplement budgetary needs by other means, or have inadequate voter education outreach initiatives in their counties. The supervisors of elections view voter education and outreach, particularly for first time voters, as critical elements for successful election outcomes. For example, Ion Sancho, supervisor of elections for Leon County maintained that voter education could have greatly reduced the number of voter errors made on Election Day.[44] According to Mr. Sancho, if county supervisors of elections can get adequate funding from their respective boards of county commissioners, then they can usually offer sufficient outreach to their communities. He determined that in most instances, the supervisors of elections will satisfy the minimum state legal requirement of purchasing an advertisement in the newspaper to educate voters on the election process.[45]

Similarly, supervisors of elections are often unsuccessful in obtaining sufficient funding from their respective boards of county commissioners for election needs. In addition, some counties have larger budgetary limits for voting equipment, while smaller Florida counties do not have the resources to pay for similar resources.[46]

In those instances when supervisors of elections are unsuccessful in obtaining additional funding from their respective boards of county commissioners, there is currently little, if any, recourse.[50] Ms. Carroll, former supervisor of elections for Broward County, explained that the supervisor of elections position is the only constitutional office that has no appeals process to challenge the approved funding amount.[51] Her testimony described how in 1993, when the Broward County Board of Commissioners denied her budget request for new voting machinery to replace the county’s existing punch card voting system, there were no state or federal funds available to alternatively finance her request.[52]

Similarly, Miriam M. Oliphant, the incumbent supervisor of elections for Broward County, also confronts lingering obstacles in obtaining sufficient local funding for her county’s voting needs. During the time of the Commission’s Miami hearing, Ms. Oliphant had anticipated sufficient financial support from Broward County.

In spite of the widespread call for election reform in Florida, the Broward County Board of County Commissioners recently requested that the supervisor of elections office for Broward County reduce its budget submission by 5 percent for fiscal year 2002, due to anticipated economic difficulties in the county.[54] Moreover, the board

In response, the supervisor of elections office for Broward County emphasized the need for appropriate county funding to support voter outreach efforts to multi-cultural county residents, the replacement of the current punch card voting and tabulation system, the impact of legislative reapportionment, advertising and public service announcements, initiatives that address systemic problems that occurred during the November 2000 presidential election, staffing increases, and other concerns.[56] Ms. Oliphant ultimately advised the Broward County Board that she may need to again request supplemental funding from the board, if pending state legislation has a negative impact on her office’s fiscal year 2002 budget appropriations.[57]

Another supervisor of elections has an alternative method of addressing reduced budget requests. Harry Sawyer, Monroe County supervisor of elections contended that denied or reduced proposed budgets can be addressed by interpreting current Florida statutes.[58] Specifically, a Florida statutory provision requires that “each supervisor of elections shall certify to the board of county commissioners, or county budget commission …a proposed budget of income and expenditures to fulfill the duties, responsibilities, and operation of the office of the supervisor of elections for the ensuing fiscal year of the county.”[59] Moreover, a subsequent provision states that, “[t]he independence of the supervisor of elections shall be preserved concerning the purchase of supplies and equipment; the selection of personnel; and the hiring, firing, and setting of salaries of personnel.”[60] As a result, Mr. Sawyer suggested that the independent status of his position as a supervisor of elections requires that he must protect his proposed budget, in order to fulfill his official duties.[61] He indicated that if Monroe County reduced its supervisor of elections’ office budgetary request in these areas (i.e., supplies and equipment, the selection of personnel, and employee salaries), he would be “entitled to take legal action to bring my budget in compliance with state law.”[62] Hence, supervisors of elections who are in similar budgetary scenarios have to devise their own strategies for supplementing unmet financial needs, or else witness the residents of their counties do without needed voting resources.

Similarly, the state provides relatively little, if any, financial support to ensure that the supervisors of elections can meet their obligations on Election Day. Instead, the Division of Elections, under the secretary of state, sets forth the minimum requirements to meet these regulations. Further, Secretary of State Katherine Harris testified at the Commission hearing that,

While Secretary Harris acknowledged that the Department of State is charged with obtaining and maintaining uniformity in application, operation and interpretation of the election law, she testified this “goal is achieved by the Division’s authority to issue formal and informal advisory opinions to supervisors of elections and through the opportunities to provide training and educational assistance to our supervisors of elections, other agencies and the public.”[64]

Secretary Harris indicated that she delegates the duty to provide technical assistance to the Division of Elections on voter education and election personnel training services because she “consider[s] those people to be the experts and [to] be able to give far greater technical assistance than could I.”[65] She maintained that while the Division does provide voter education and training services, the responsibilities of poll worker training and election matters are left to the supervisors of elections who are “independently elected local officials who conduct elections.”[66]

When the secretary of state did request $100,000 in funds from the Florida legislature for a media budget to aid in the “get out the vote” efforts of associations in Florida, the governor, however, “zero funded that and refused to fund it in his budget.”[67] As a consequence, “there was no budget in the state of Florida for voter education which relates to media.”[68] Thus, counties and their supervisors of elections were required to seek funding from county legislatures or from other fund-raising activities.[69] Ion Sancho testified that “the Association of Supervisors of Elections, went out and raised our own money from private corporations in the attempt to set up some sort of a voter education and voter turnout fund. And essentially that’s how the process has worked in Florida.”[70]

The Commission received testimony that the Division of Elections does provide technical assistance to supervisors of elections on voter education and election personnel training services upon request. The problem, noted one witness, is “from county to county you’ve got so many different voting systems…they might can provide that technical assistance for this county…[but] then you’ve got to turn around to another county and provide a different type of assistance, and you’ve got…10, 12 or 14 different voting systems in the state of Florida.”[71]

The lack of funding, however, continues to be one of the most challenging obstacles that confronts Florida’s supervisors of elections. According to Leon County’s supervisor of election, the paucity of resources not only affected voter education, “but they affect the hiring and training of election-day workers, as well as providing polling locations which must be convenient and accessible to our population if we want voters to vote.”[72] Gadsden County’s supervisor of elections, Shirley Knight, also confirmed this by testifying that there must be more money for training poll workers and additional polling places. In Gadsden County, she noted, people drive “miles and miles” to vote.[73]

Thus, individual counties struggle to shoulder the bulk of the responsibility for training poll workers. The counties vary widely in their approaches to poll worker training. As a result, it is unclear whether the training approaches and quantity of instruction offered in different counties were beneficial to their respective poll workers.[74] For example, in Monroe County, the supervisor of elections holds a half-day training course for all poll-workers and additional training for precinct leaders and workers responsible for the AccuVote machines used in the county. Teresa LePore, the supervisor of elections in Palm Beach County testified:

Nevertheless, Ms. LePore recognized the limitations that exist in training a large number of poll workers:

On November 7, 2000, one of the most significant Election Day issues became the availability of resources to handle the large number of voters. Voters and poll workers who testified at Commission hearings held in Tallahassee and Miami were in one accord about the various problems that occurred such as, inadequate telephone communication systems in the offices of the supervisor of elections, the inability to reach their respective supervisors of elections offices on Election Day to verify individuals’ voter registration, and the accessibility of computerized voter registration information.[77]

The Commission heard testimony from some of Florida’s voters and poll workers, who expressed their dissatisfaction with the resources that were available to them on November 7, 2000. Specifically, several witnesses observed that on Election Day, inadequate telephone systems in supervisors of elections offices affected precinct workers’ abilities to confirm voters’ registration status.[78] The following line of questioning during the Commission’s Miami hearing portrays this difficulty:

One poll worker also noted that some African Americans with current voter registration cards were unable to vote because their names were not included on the county’s registered voter list.[81] Moreover, poll workers believed they could not remedy this problem by using voting by affidavit as an alternative.[82] This belief ultimately contributed to the number of Florida residents who were unable to cast their vote on Election Day. For example, Maria DeSoto, a Broward County poll worker, testified that in her opinion at least 40 people were turned away from the voting precinct, due to the poll workers’ inability to contact the supervisor of elections office.[83]

Telephonic communication was not the only method for some election precincts to verify the accuracy of their precincts’ voter registration registers. In one county, precinct workers were provided with laptop computers in order to check the accuracy of the precinct registers against the master county registration list. For example, David Leahy, supervisor of elections for Miami-Dade County, had access to 18 laptop computers.[84] Mr. Leahy testified that he placed most of these computers, regardless of the demographic composition of the precinct, in precincts where the voting population was the most transient.[85] As a result, the vast majority of the laptop computers in Miami-Dade were situated in mostly Cuban American voting precincts.[86] Mr. Leahy noted that only one laptop computer was located in a largely African American precinct.[87]

Broward County also used laptop computers in 31 of its largest precincts on Election Day. The supervisor of elections for Broward County explained that the original purpose for these computers was to facilitate access to county voter registration information from the precinct level.[88] In retrospect, Ms. Carroll determined there was limited success with this technological venture. In spite of the training that the staff received, “they didn’t always know exactly what they were looking up on the computer.”[89]

The state’s Division of Elections receives yearly fiscal appropriations for Florida’s elections. The state of Florida, however, provides few, if any, direct financial resources to supervisors of elections offices. As a result, county supervisors of elections rely on their respective boards of county commissioners and/or private financing sources to fund various election preparation needs, such as: voter education and outreach, voting equipment, polling precincts’ resources, poll worker training, and providing appropriate polling locations and communication systems.

This lack of financial resources hinders the ability of Florida’s supervisors of elections in providing all of their county residents an equal opportunity to vote.

[1] Miriam M. Oliphant, supervisor of elections for Broward County, Testimony, Miami Verified Transcript, Feb. 16, 2001, p. 287.

[2] “Florida Budget Process,” n.d., <http://www.acs.org/government/stateinfo/flbg.pdf> (Mar. 20, 2001) (hereafter cited as “Florida Budget Process”). Although the legislative session is limited to sixty calendar days, the duration of the session may be extended by a three-fifths vote in the State House of Representatives and the Senate.

[3] “Budget Process Overview,” Florida e-Budget, n.d., <http://www.ebudget.state.fl.us/overview.asp> (Mar. 20, 2001) (hereafter cited as “Budget Process Overview”) .

[4] “Budget Process Overview.”

[5] “Budget Process Overview.”

[6] “Budget Process Overview.” “Differences between the Senate and the House budgets are resolved in a joint conference committee.” Ibid.

[7] “Budget Process Overview,” Florida e-Budget, n.d., <http://www.ebudget.state.fl.us/overview.asp> (Mar. 20, 2001).

[8] “Budget Process Overview.” Once the legislature passes the budget, the new appropriation becomes valid beginning each July 1st.

[9] “Florida Budget Process”; “Budget Process Overview.” See L. Clayton Roberts, director of the Division of Elections, Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 269. Mr. Roberts cited an example of Governor Bush not approving the Division’s request for voter education funding. As a result, the request was not presented to the Florida legislature for approval.

[10] Katherine Harris, secretary of state, Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, pp. 280-281.

[11] Katherine Harris Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 281.

[12] Jeb Bush, governor of the state of Florida, Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 11, 2001, pp. 98-99.

[13] Jeb Bush, governor of the state of Florida, Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 11, 2001, pp. 99. See Collins Center for Public Policy, Revitalizing Democracy in Florida: The Governor’s Select Task Force on Election Procedures, Standards & Technology,” n.d., <http://www.collinscenter.org/usr__ doc/52816.doc, p. 19> (Mar. 21, 2001), p. 19 (hereafter cited as “Governor’s Select Task Force”). The task force noted that the state of Florida should provide its counties with adequate funding in order to develop new voting systems and high standards to ensure that voters understand how to use these systems.

[14] Katherine Harris Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, pp. 239-240.

[15] “About Us—Director’s Office,” Division of Elections—Florida Department of State, n.d., <http://www.election.dos.state.fl.us/about/director.shtml> (May 9, 2001). The office also interprets Florida’s elections laws, provides technical assistance to supervisors of elections on voting systems, offers procedural training to all relevant state agencies on implementing the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, collects statistics on the effectiveness of Florida’s election laws, ensures that voter registration applications and forms comply with the parameters of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and establishes rules to execute the state’s election law provisions.

[16] Katherine Harris Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, pp. 267, 277-278.

[17] Katherine Harris Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, pp. 277-278.

[18] But see L. Clayton Roberts Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 269. Mr. Roberts testified that previously the Division of Elections had 70 full time equivalent employees.

[19] Katherine Harris Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 268. See also “Running the Recount - - GOP Loyalist Vows Fairness in Overseeing Florida Tally,” ABCNEWS.Com, Nov. 15, 2000, <http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/Daily news/Election_harrisbio001113.html>(Mar. 27, 2001) (Secretary Harris was elected as secretary of state in 1998).

[20] Jane Carroll, former supervisor of elections for Broward County, Testimony, Miami Verified Transcript, Feb. 16, 2001, pp. 304-305. Additionally, Ms. Carroll explained that “we have an unfunded mandate statute that says that the Florida legislature cannot mandate that the local governments or counties in particular spend dollars mandated by the Florida legislature if it goes above the amount of $500,000.”

[21] James L. Roberts, Monroe County administrator, Response to Commission’s Interrogatory #6, Apr. 9, 2001.

[22] James L. Roberts, Resp. to Interrog. #6.

[23] Linda Howell, supervisor of elections for Madison County, Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 102.

[24] Harry Sawyer, supervisor of elections for Monroe County, Testimony, Miami Verified Transcript, Feb. 16, 2001, pp. 344-345.

[25] L. Clayton Roberts Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 287. But see Katherine Harris Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 291. Secretary Harris believed that the Florida legislature should be more responsive to local funding needs, due to the closeness of the November 2000 presidential election.

[26] See also Ion Sancho, supervisor of elections for Leon County, Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 57. Mr. Sancho testified that in 1992, Jim Smith, in his former capacity as the secretary of state, made arrangements with the Florida Association of Broadcasters in order to obtain free 30-second television air-time for voter outreach purposes. The county supervisors of elections then used this air-time to educate Florida’s residents on voting information. According to Mr. Sancho, “[w]e used some of those same spots in 1994, but no secretary of state after that has provided any resources like that to the Florida Association of Supervisor[s] of Elections or elections in general.” Ibid., pp. 57-58.

[27] L. Clayton Roberts, director, Florida Department of State, Division of Elections, “Provider Contract,” Apr. 7, 2000, 0014713; Katherine Harris, secretary of state, Florida Department of State, “General Requisition,” Apr. 11, 2000, 0014737. See L. Clayton Roberts Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, pp. 270-71. See also Florida Outdoor Advertising Association, Inc., “Contract for Statewide Donated Advertising Space,” Apr. 21, 2000, 0015151. (The Division of Elections spent $51,000 for the installation of at least 200 billboards from August 2000 through November 2000. These signs advocated ‘Stamp[ing] Out Voter Fraud’). See generally Florida Department of State, Division of Elections, “General Requisition,” Jan. 6, 1999, 0015389; Florida Department of State, Division of Elections, “General Requisition,” Jan. 26, 1999, 0015390; The Print Shop of Tallahassee, Inc., “Invoice,” Aug. 27, 1999, 0015473; The Print Shop of Tallahassee, Inc., “Invoice,” Aug. 13, 1999, 0015491 (Previously, in 1999, the Division of Election expended approximately $14,262 for Voter Fraud Notice posters in English and Spanish. The posters were ordered for distribution to county supervisors of elections’ offices).

[28] L. Clayton Roberts, “Provider Contract,” 0014713.

[29] L. Clayton Roberts, “Provider Contract,” 0014713.

[30] L. Clayton Roberts, director, Florida Department of State, Division of Elections, “Contract for Services,” Aug. 8, 2000, 0014837; Florida Department of State, Division of Elections, 0014853. The advertisement stated, “Call (toll free) 1-877-868-3737[,] VOTER FRAUD[,] Division of Elections[,] Florida Department of State.” Ibid. See also Charlotte Brand, director and chief executive officer, Florida Outdoor Advertising Association, Inc., “Contract for Statewide Donated Advertising Space,” Apr. 21, 2000, 0015151 (Florida Outdoor Advertising Association, Inc. provided at least 200 billboard locations for the Division’s voter fraud advertisements from August 2000 to November 2000. The Division paid $51,000 for these services).

[31] L. Clayton Roberts, “Contract for Services,” 0014837. See generally L. Clayton Roberts, “Contract for Services,” 0014838.

The Vendor [Next Generation Network, Inc.] shall broadcast the Division’s announcement in three, 3-day broadcast periods for a total of nine (9) days coinciding with two days before and the day of the first primary, the second primary and the general election. Each broadcast period shall consist of 72 hours beginning at midnight (12:00 a.m.) on the commencement date and ending at 11:59 p.m. on the termination date….During each broadcast period the Division’s announcement shall be broadcast at least 500 times per day at each of the 706 Florida locations….

Ibid.

[32] L. Clayton Roberts, “Contract for Services,” 0014838.

[33] L Clayton Roberts Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, pp. 286-287; Ion Sancho Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 101 (Mr. Sancho indicated that the only voter outreach assistance the state of Florida provides is supplying the counties with voter education pamphlets and posters).

[34] L. Clayton Roberts, director, Florida Department of State, Division of Elections, “Contract for Production of ‘Get Out to Vote’ Public Information Campaign,” Sept. 9, 2000, 0014745; The Victory Group, Inc., “Description of Services,” Sept. 30, 2000, 0014810.

[35] Katherine Harris, secretary of state, Florida Department of State, “[Draft] Letter to Station Managers,” Oct. 6, 2000, 0014792.

[36] The Victory Group, Inc., “Description of Services,” 0014810.

[37] Tony Hill, former State Representative, Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 11, 2001, p. 373.

[38] Tony Hill Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan 11, 2001, p. 373.

[39] L. Clayton Roberts Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, pp. 289-290.

[40] Ion Sancho Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 56.

[41] Ion Sancho Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 56.

[42] Ion Sancho Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 56.

[43] Ion Sancho Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 56. See Harry Sawyer, supervisor of elections for Monroe County, Response to Commission’s Interrogatory #14, Apr. 13, 2001 (Mr. Sawyer responded that the Division of Elections or the state of Florida did not provide any guidance or funding for voter education in Monroe County).

[44] Ion Sancho, Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, pp. 17-18. Mr. Sancho opined that not only do new voters require voting education, but also voters inexperienced with a voting system new to the jurisdiction.

I don’t think there was any conscious targeting or racial discrimination on the part of supervisors. I think some of the effects of not having the kinds of monies necessary to do ongoing voter education programs has the effect of in fact impacting on minorities and young people and senior citizens because this was an election that brought out voters that voted maybe only one time in the last 10 years.

Ibid., p. 52-54. (Mr. Sancho commended the NAACP for its $7 million dollar voter participation campaign, but stated voter participation is not the responsibility of advocacy groups. He indicated that states and counties must merge to be the predominate leaders in the area of voter education and participation).

[45] Ion Sancho Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, pp. 17-18. See Fla. Stat. ch . 98.255 (1999). “Each supervisor of elections is authorized to provide voter educational programs and materials of a nonpartisan nature in his or her county as he or she may deem appropriate.” Id.

[46] Jim Smith Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 11, 2001, p. 165. See also The Florida Election Reform Act of 2001, S.B. 1118, 103rd Reg. Sess. (Fla. 2001), pp. 95-96. (A more extensive discussion of this Act is found in the Epilogue chapter of this report). The Act uses factors such as, the population size and number of voting precincts in each county to determine budget appropriations for local voting systems, voter education programs, and poll worker recruitment and training initiatives. Accordingly, for the purposes of this discussion, the Commission assumes that these factors were previously employed to appropriate counties’ budgets to determine allegations for elections purposes.

[47] Denny Hutchinson, former supervisor of elections for Gadsden County, Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 104.

[48] Howell and Sancho Testimonies, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, pp. 105-106.

[49] Jim Smith Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 11, 2001, p. 159.

[50] Harry Sawyer, supervisor of elections for Monroe County, Response to Commission’s Interrogatory #17, Apr. 13, 2001. “At the present time we do not have a mechanism to challenge Monroe County[‘s] refusal of a submitted budget from the supervisor of elections office]. We are working on a bill that would provide for such a challenge.” Ibid.

[51] Jane Carroll Testimony, Miami Verified Transcript, Feb. 16, 2001, pp. 279-80.

[52] Jane Carroll Testimony, Miami Verified Transcript, Feb. 16, 2001, pp. 270-71.

[53] Miriam M. Oliphant Testimony, Miami Verified Transcript, Feb. 16, 2001, pp. 286-88. See John E. Rodstrom, chairman of the Broward County Board of County Commissioners, Testimony, Miami Verified Transcript, Feb. 16, 2001, pp. 278-79 (Mr. Rodstrom described how the board will be working with the supervisor of elections office for Broward County to address those concerns that arose during the November 2000 presidential election). See also United States Commission on Civil Rights, Interview Report, Telephone Interview with John E. Rodstrom, chairman of the Broward County Board of County Commissioners, Jan 30, 2001, p. 2 (Mr. Rodstrom indicated that the board usually “rubber stamps” the Broward County supervisor of elections office’s budget proposals).

[54] Roger J. Desjarlais, county administrator for Broward County Board of County Commissioners, Letter to Miriam M. Oliphant, Mar. 13, 2001; Miriam M. Oliphant, supervisor of elections for Broward County, Memorandum to Roger J. Desjarlais, Mar. 22, 2001.

[55] Roger J. Desjarlais, county administrator for Broward County Board of County Commissioners, Letter to Miriam M. Oliphant, Mar. 13, 2001.

If the economy cools even more than anticipated or the State or Federal governments cut funding to counties or force additional unfounded mandates, we will undoubtedly need to look for reductions in our base budget[,] which is why I am asking all tax supported agencies to prepare five percent reduction plans to accompany the budget submission.

Ibid.

[56] Miriam M. Oliphant, supervisor of elections for Broward County, Memorandum to Roger J. Desjarlais, Mar. 22, 2001.

[57] Miriam M. Oliphant, supervisor of elections for Broward County, Memorandum to Roger J. Desjarlais, Mar. 22, 2001. See discussion in the Epilogue chapter of this report, for a more detailed analysis of current state legislation.

[58] See Harry Sawyer, supervisor of elections for Monroe County, Response to Commission’s Interrogatory #17, Apr. 13, 2001.

[59] Fla. Stat. ch. 129.201(1) (2000).

[60] Fla. Stat. ch. 129.202(2) (2000) (emphasis added).

[61] See Harry Sawyer, supervisor of elections for Monroe County, Response to Commission’s Interrogatory #17, Apr. 13, 2001.

[62] Harry Sawyer, Resp. to Interrog. #17.

[63] Katherine Harris Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 247.

[64] Katherine Harris Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 243.

[65] Katherine Harris Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 247.

[66] Katherine Harris Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 243.

[67] Ion Sancho Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 34.

[68] Ion Sancho Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 34.

[69]Ion Sancho Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 34. Mr. Sancho testified that he “personally raised money from teachers, lawyers and other individuals of Leon County so that Leon County could spend a radio and television advertising budget that was totally separate from what the county [allotted] because the county did not provide much in that area….” Ibid., pp. 34-35.

[70] Ion Sancho Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001 pp. 34-35. These funds were allocated to a separate voter education advertising budget. See ibid., pp. 57-58.

The former Secretary of State Jim Smith contacted the Florida Association of Broadcasters…and they did free 30-second television spots that were distributed to the supervisor of elections office, so the supervisors could put 30-second television spots on the television to provide information and motivational information to the voters on voting. That was in 1992. We used some of those same spots in 1994, but no secretary of state after that has provided any resources like that to the Florida Association of supervisor of elections or elections in general.

Ibid.

[71] Denny Hutchinson Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 22.

[72] Ion Sancho Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 19.

[73] Shirley Knight, supervisor of elections for Gadsden County, Testimony, Jan. 12, 2001, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 28.

[74] See Marvin Rickles, Jr., (Deputy) poll worker - Precinct 74B in Palm Beach County, Testimony, Miami Verified Transcript, Feb. 16, 2001, pp. 127, 133-134. Mr. Rickles testified that certain poll workers attend three yearly two-hour training classes. Poll workers were given no special preparation for an anticipated large voter turn-out on Election Day. He stated, “[t]hey merely go over the book, tell you…the duties of the deputy, and that’s the extent of it.” Ibid.

[75] Teresa LePore Testimony, Miami Verified Transcript, Feb. 16, 2001, p. 375.

[76] Teresa LePore Testimony, Miami Verified Transcript, Feb. 16, 2001, p. 376.

[77] Bob Poe, Democratic National Party, “Voting Problems List,” 0000465, Affidavit of Marvin J. Rickles, Jr., Precinct Deputy in Precincts #74B and #74G in Palm Beach County (Other problems included: the number of poll workers and the adequacy of their training, access to bilingual poll workers, and the availability of ballots in non English languages).

On November 7, 2000, I observed many people leaving the two precincts who were denied the right to vote because the precinct clerks could not reach the supervisor of elections to confirm their voter eligibility. Throughout the day, many individuals who were not allowed to vote told me that the clerk could not reach the supervisor of elections because the telephone lines were continuously busy. I personally counted seventeen individuals in a two-hour period during the afternoon who told me they were not allowed to vote because the clerk could not reach the supervisor of elections. Many of these individuals were angry.

Ibid.

[78] Poll workers Panel, Miami Verified Transcript, p. 157 (A panel of poll workers who testified before the Commission agreed it was harder to get through to supervisors of elections in this election than in the past); Angenora Ramsey, Testimony, Miami Verified Transcript, Feb. 16, 2001, p. 96.(One poll worker testified that it took her three hours to get through to the Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections Office, which was unprecedented in her 16 years as a poll worker).

[79] Barbara Phoele, poll worker-Precinct 6C in Broward County, Testimony, Miami Verified Transcript, Feb. 16, 2001, pp. 125, 136.

[80] Marilyn Nelson, poll worker-Precinct 232 in Miami-Dade County, Testimony, Miami Verified Transcript, Feb. 16, 2001, pp. 129-30.

[81] Marilyn Nelson Testimony, Miami Verified Transcript, Feb. 16, 2001, p. 140.

[82] Ion Sancho Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 63; Linda Howell Testimony, Tallahassee Verified Transcript, Jan. 12, 2001, p. 63; Maria DeSoto, Palm Beach County poll worker, Testimony, Miami Verified Transcript, Feb. 16, 2001, p. 144 (“MR. FOREMAN [to Ms. DeSoto]: “[I]f I come to your precinct, I’m not on your precinct roll, but you cannot reach the supervisors of elections, can I vote by affidavit?” MS. DESOTO: No.”“) Ibid.

[83] Maria DeSoto Testimony, Miami Verified Transcript, Feb. 16, 2001, pp. 136, 142 (Ms. Desoto noted that she was only able to get through to the supervisor of elections two or three times despite her numerous attempts); Barbara Phoele Testimony, Miami Verified Transcript, Feb. 16, 2001, p. 136 (Likewise, Ms. Phoele stated that she was aware of 40-50, mostly African Americans and Hispanics, who were frustrated with long lines and left).

[84] David Leahy Testimony, Miami Verified Transcript, Feb. 16, 2001, p. 324.

[85] David Leahy Testimony, Miami Verified Transcript, Feb. 16, 2001, p. 324 (Mr. Leahy explained that the Miami-Dade County Supervisor of Elections Office receives the most inquiries from those precincts in areas in which the population is growing, as determined by the number of new residents).

[86] United States Commission on Civil Rights, Interview Report, Telephone Interviews with David Leahy, Miami-Dade County supervisor of elections, Feb. 1, and Feb. 5, 2001.

[87] David Leahy Testimony, Miami Verified Transcript, Feb. 16, 2001, p. 324.

[88] Jane Carroll Testimony, Miami Verified Transcript, Feb. 16, 2001, pp. 296-97.

[89] Jane Carroll Testimony, Miami Verified Transcript, Feb. 16, 2001, p. 297 (Ms. Carroll noted that these individuals were not the same workers who were routinely employed by her office).

Fiscal Year	Approved Budget
FY 1998-1999	$3,974,746