Dodge City, Kan. (KWCH) – In 2023, the Kansas Legislative Post-Audit Division released a report on election security proceduresevaluating what auditors deemed to be 55 best practices in 15 Kansas counties in the 2022 general election. Of the 15 counties, it included those that are home to larger metropolitan counties and smaller counties.

These 55 best practices include five Kansas laws and 50 national recommendations. Results were mixed for all counties assessed, with some areas rated adequate and inadequate.

Sam Dadds, lead auditor for the Kansas Legislative Division for Post-Audit, said, “Counties have different security needs based on their size and the resources they have available. It is therefore unrealistic to expect every county to implement all 55 practices.

One county stood out. This month, two follow-up audits were released, prompting concerns lawmakers expressed about the Ford County elections office during a audienceand they sent a stern message to the county clerk for not showing up to answer questions about the audits.

“If I were in Ford County, I would have serious concerns about the upcoming elections,” responded one deputy during the vote. October 7 hearing.

Another lawmaker on the Legislative Post-Audit Committee remarked, “I’m a little disturbed that the county clerk isn’t here to answer these questions. These are simple things, the transfer of materials to and from concerns me.

Here’s the problem: Both audits released this month focus on Ford County. The first is Review of Ford County Election Security Procedures in the 2022 General Election. The second is Examining Ford County’s Ballot Reconciliation Process in the 2024 Primary Election.

Starting with the audit focused on the 2022 general election, which follows the 2023 audit exploring the same topic but re-evaluating it in Ford County, as initially, auditors were unable to access everything the materials and equipment necessary to carry out the audit.

A subpoena was issued in August 2024 demanding participation.

“Some of this Ford County material was sealed with the ballots. By law, ballots remain sealed and we cannot unseal them without a subpoena, so we cannot inspect these documents,” said Sam Dadds, senior auditor for the Kansas Legislative Division, who worked on audits. “Another problem was that when we were on site at the Ford County Election Office, we did not have access to the county’s election management computer.

Ford County Clerk Debbie Cox responded to the subpoena during a August hearing on the subject.

Cox said, “I believe I filled out all the requested paperwork that they wanted, that I understood. I emailed them and sent a box.

Auditors are looking at four areas in this monitoring in Ford County.

Overall process security was considered adequate. Ballot tracking and security of voting and tabulation machines were both adequate and inadequate, with the main rating regarding testing practices not being considered up to par with voting and tabulation machines.

The weakest areas were IT security of election management and security of transfers and movement of election results, media, and transfers of ballots from the election office to the polling location and back to the election office. Again, this is because auditors were unable to access what was needed to complete this portion of the 2023 audit.

The follow-up audit confirmed that the computer used to tabulate election results was not connected to the Internet as required by law and had no additional software, stored in a locked room. However, since this could not be proven in 2022, the county was not credited.

Dadds said: “It’s been two years since the general in 2022; we couldn’t give them credit for it. This is why Ford County has lower scores in this area. When it comes to transfer and travel security, this includes things like having election workers return ballots to the election office. Part of secure transfers and travel would be ensuring that ballots are in a sealed container. The seals have serial numbers that are tracked. There is a chain of custody form stating that so-and-so accounted for these ballots, and they were returned to that person at the election office. Ford County really didn’t have any such records in 2022 that we could inspect; this is why some transfer and movement safety scores were lower.

The 2024 audit indicated that documentation was in place for the 2024 primary.

The final area was written safety policies, and those in Ford County were not considered adequate. In the 2023 audit, none of the 15 counties were rated as having written election security policies.

Ford County provided the following response to the audit, writing: “I am continually working with the Secretary of State’s Office to create templates for security forms and processes. I have now purchased the test board. I test every machine and CF cards. These are the CF cards that count the ballots. Each CF card is tested as well as the machines.

Ford County’s other 2024 election audit focused on reconciling ballots in the 2024 primary election. This included voters going through the signature process in a poll book before vote, and at the close of the poll, the number of ballots cast is deemed to correspond to the number of people who have registered in the poll book.

Of the five voting sites, the audit found that one site was not balanced because there was one fewer registration than the number of ballots cast. The audit also said it was the auditors who discovered the problem while reviewing the documentation.

The audit found that a poll worker registered another poll worker to vote, but never completed the poll book signing process due to a malfunction of the electronic poll book. After reviewing it, the auditors could see that the process had started but was never completed. In this case, the audit indicated that the poll worker should have moved to another poll book to complete the process.

In response, Ford County’s elections official said he plans to retrain poll workers and worksheets to report voting equipment malfunctions.

The final part of this audit was the voter declaration, which found that the language used in the poll book declaration and early voting application was outdated and did not reflect current law. This was updated September 2024.

Here is Ford County’s response during the second audit: “I will be undergoing special training so that the supervising judges can review the forms. I will focus on these forms and how to fill them out. I will ask them what could help them complete it or understand them better. I will review the poll books with all board employees and insist that the supervising judges and election officials step aside if they have a problem with a machine and let me know immediately . We must not wait until after the elections.”

12 News repeatedly tried to speak with Cox about these audits, but we were told she was too busy preparing for the upcoming election. Instead, she provided a statement saying, “I will continue to train with board employees and continue to work with the Office of the Secretary of State for Security.” I have no further comments.

Again, here’s what the audit says will be different for the next election from Ford County’s response to the audit: Items purchased to test election equipment, updated voter declaration to comply with state law, documentation in place for ballot tracking and concentration. on training.

“See if they have made progress or see if the situation has improved. It’s pretty egregious,” a Kansas lawmaker said at the Oct. 7 hearing.

This month, lawmakers ordered another audit to evaluate the November general election in Ford County. It will examine many of the same topics, including whether new state laws are being followed.

Copyright 2024 KWCH. All rights reserved. To report a correction or typo, please email [email protected]