Document Actions
Advisory Opinion Requests - comment period closed
Acting Director of the EAC's Grants and Payments Division - AOR-09-001
Questions:
1) Does HAVA require a hard or soft match given that language in HAVA requires states to appropriate matching funds?
2) Does the HAVA provision in Section 253 (b)(5) that “the State has appropriated funds,” also incorporate counties/local units of government?
3) May a state use part of its or its counties annual operating funds to meet the matching requirement? (Note: the expenditure of such funds could not also be part of maintenance of effort or financed with HAVA funds).If yes, then:
a) Must state or county proposed expenditures for matching funds be incurred for Title III-related activities before the submission of the certification of compliance with Section 253(b) of HAVA? If not; and expenditures to be incurred subsequent to the submission of the certification are eligible matching costs, then:
b) Must the State also contribute interest based on the amount of interest that would have been earned had the amount of costs to be incurred been appropriated in advance and deposited in the State election fund? If yes, then:
c) How would the interest be calculated?
4) Are matching funds subject to the same record-keeping, accounting, and audit requirements as Federal HAVA funds?
Comment period closed November 17, 2008 - No comments received
New York State Board of Elections State - AOR-08-026
Question:
"May Suffolk County purchase six vehicles for use as part of the county's Voter Education plan?"
Comment period closed October 20, 2008 - No comments received
Indiana Secretary of State - AOR-08-025
Question:
"May HAVA funds be used for the purchase of voting systems to replace voting systems originally purchased with HAVA funds when the Indiana General Assembly considers the circumstances of certain counties as different from other counties that have requested to use HAVA money to purchase 'replacement' voting system. The distinction that the Indiana General Assembly desires that the EAC make is that some states have sought authorization to use HAVA funds to replace functioning HAVA compliant voting systems, whereas, voting systems that certain Indiana counties seek to replace have become functionally obsolete due to lack of technical and other operating support."
Comment period closed October 20, 2008 - No comments received
West Virginia Office of the Secretary of State - AOR-08-024
Background:
West Virginia is financing a revolving loan fund using $2.78 million of Help America Vote Act (HAVA), Section 251 funds. The loan fund is used to make non-interest bearing loans to counties for the purchase of HAVA-compliant voting equipment and related services. Under individual “Monthly Repayment Loan Agreements” counties are required to repay the loan fund.
According to the Monthly Repayment Loan Agreements, counties “shall be in compliance with and shall thereafter remain in compliance with all Federal and State laws” so long as any part of the loan is outstanding. Furthermore, as long as any part of the loan is outstanding, the county “shall maintain proper books of records and accounts in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles consistently applied, in which full, true and correct entries shall be made.”
Counties have made payments to the loan fund and the State Election Commission has reissued loans of $281,786.
Questions:
1. Do the funds in the revolving loan fund ever lose their identify as Federal funds?
2. Is equipment that was purchased with loan funds that were subsequently repaid by counties considered to be purchased with Federal funds?
Comment period closed August 18, 2008 - No comments received
Wayne County, New York Board of Elections - AOR-08-023
Question:
May the County use Help America Vote Act funds to pay poll workers to attend a newly created all-day training session and to pay for lunch provided during the training session?
Comment period closed August 1, 2008 - No comments received
Acting Director, HAVA Payment and Grants Division, U.S. Election Assistance Commission - AOR -08-022
Question:
Are State certifications submitted pursuant to Section 251(b)(2) of the Help America Vote Act for the using requirements payments to improve the administration of elections for Federal office retroactive to periods prior to the submission of the certification?
Comment period closed August 1, 2008 - No comments received
Office of the California Secretary of State - AOR-08-21
Question:
Are poll worker training and voter education considered part of the Help America Vote Act’s (HAVA) Title III requirements and can they be paid for using HAVA Section 251 funds, regardless of a certification filed under HAVA section 251(b)(2)?
Comment period closed August 1, 2008 - No comments received
Office of the California Secretary of State - AOR-08-020
Question:
Does the Election Assistance Commission’s March 20, 2008 policy regarding replacement of voting systems purchases with Help America Vote Act HAVA funds allow HAVA funds to be used for reimbursement of the costs of optical scan and peripheral equipment, as shown below, needed to replace DRE’s previously purchased with HAVA funds?
1. High-speed, central-count, optical scan tabulators.
2. Precinct-based optical scan tabulators.
3. Voting booths (polling place booths to ensure that voters can mark paper ballots in private).
4. Paper-ballot processing carts (to assist with storing, moving, sorting and processing paper ballots).
5. Ballot boxes (to securely store ballots at the polling place and for transport to central tabulation facilities).
6. Privacy sleeves (to ensure the secrecy of the marked box).
Comment period closed August 1, 2008 - No comments received
EAC Inspector General - AOR-08-019
Question:
How should the increase in the State match be calculated if a State uses the requirements payment as a reimbursement under 251(c)(2)?
Comment period closed May 29, 2008 - No comments received
EAC Inspector General - AOR-08-018
Question:
How should the above referenced "maintenance of effort requirements" be calculated?
Comment period closed May 29, 2008 - No comments received
EAC Inspector General - AOR-08-017
Question:
What does "multiyear contract" mean as used in Section 251(c)(2) of HAVA:
"Special Rule Regarding Multiyear Contracts - A State may use a requirements payment for any costs for voting equipment which meets the requirements of Section 301 that, pursuant to a multiyear contract, were incurred on or after January 1, 2001, except that the amount that the State is otherwise required to contribute under the maintenance of effort requirements of Section 254(a)(7) shall be increased by the amount of the payment made with respect to such multiyear contract."
ACTING DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF HAVA PAYMENTS AND GRANTS, EAC – AOR-08-016
Question:
May HAVA funds be used for training poll workers to register new voters?
Comment period closed May 29, 2008 - No comments received
ACTING DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF HAVA PAYMENTS AND GRANTS, EAC – AOR-08-015
Question:
May HAVA funds be used for advertisements encouraging citizens to register to vote?
Comment period closed May 29, 2008 - No comments received
ACTING DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF HAVA PAYMENTS AND GRANTS, EAC – AOR-08-014
Question:
May HAVA funds be used for voter registration drives or rallies including advertising for the event, setting up booths, and paying salaries of employees who register new voters?
Comment period closed May 29, 2008 - No comments received
ACTING DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF HAVA PAYMENTS AND GRANTS, EAC – AOR-08-013
Question:
May HAVA funds be used for preparing and providing instructions on how to register to vote?
Comment period closed May 29, 2008 - No comments received
RHODE ISLAND – AOR-08-012
Question:
What are the requirements for the disposal of equipment that has been purchased with HAVA funds?
Comment period closed May 29, 2008 - No comments received
ILLINOIS – AOR-08-011
Question:
May an election jurisdiction sell the HAVA-funded voting equipment which will be replaced and use the revenue from the sale to finance costs of the new equipment or other items as provided for in Sections 101 or 251 of HAVA?
Comment period closed May 29, 2008 - No comments received
ILLINOIS – AOR-08-010
Question:
May election jurisdictions that previously purchased voting equipment with HAVA funds purchase different voting equipment with HAVA funds to replace the previously purchased voting equipment?
Comment period closed May 29, 2008 - No comments received
SACRAMENTO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA - AOR-08-009
Question:
May HAVA Section 251 funds be used for the purchase, installation, and upkeep of electronic Roster Book equipment (electronic poll books), as part of meeting the Title III requirements and not just as an improvement to the administration of Federal elections?
Comment period closed May 29, 2008 - No comments received
SACRAMENTO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA - AOR-08-008
Question:
May HAVA Section 251 funds be used for required voting system maintenance, including preventative maintenance performed to maintain compliant status, as part of meeting the Title III requirements and not just as an improvement to the administration of Federal elections?
Comment period closed May 29, 2008 - No comments received
PENNSYLVANIA – AOR-08-007
Question:
May HAVA funds be used to pay for voter registration forms?
Comment period closed May 29, 2008 - No comments received
Ohio - AOR-08-006
Question:
May grantees or subgrantees determine to discontinue use of voting machines purchased wtih federal grant money because the grantee or subgrantee determines the machines are not safe for their intended use?
Comment period closed May 29, 2008 - No comments received
Ohio – AOR-08-005
Question:
Are grantees or subgrantees of federal grant monies subject to any federal reporting/accounting regulations if the grantee or subgrantee destroys voting machines purchased with federal grant money because the machines were damaged and no longer functional for their intended purpose?
Comment period closed May 29, 2008 - No comments received
Illinois - AOR-08-004
Question:
If not (to the previous question), how should the indirect costs be allocated to the various HAVA programs?
Comment period closed May 29, 2008 - No comments received
ILLINOIS – AOR-08-003
Question:
(1) May indirect costs, subject to an approved indirect cost rate, of operating all EAC HAVA programs be charged to Section 101 funds?
Comment period closed May 29, 2008 - No comments received
U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS – AOR- 08-002
Question:
Will EAC waive the requirement for the appropriation of matching funds, contained in Section 253 (b) (5) of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), for the Virgin Islands to receive an FY08 requirements payment, in accordance with Title 48 Section 1469 a (d) of the United States Code (also applicable to Guam and American Samoa)?
Title 48 Section 1469 a (d) says “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in the case of American Samoa, Guam, the Virgin Islands and the Northern Marian Islands any department or agency shall waive any requirement for local matching funds under $200,000 (including in-kind contributions) required by law to be provided by American Samoa, Guam, the Virgin Islands, or the Northern Mariana Islands.”
Comment period closed May 29, 2008 - No comments received
KENTUCKY – AOR-08-001
Question:
Does the MOE requirement apply in the same manner to states that (1) had a voter registration database that subsequently met the requirements of HAVA and (2) do not use HAVA funds to operate and maintain the database. Stated differently, if a state spent funds to implement a voter registration data base in fiscal year 2000 that meets the requirements of HAVA and continues to operate the system with state funds, should state expenditures for the data base in the fiscal year that ended prior to November 2000 be included in the state’s base year level of effort?
Comment period closed May 29, 2008 - No comments received
####